What is the D plan's to become a used language?

[Joakim via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 21 December 2014 at 10:26:45 UTC, Russel Winder via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> D was started as a better C++. Technically that may be true, 
> but it
> has failed to gain traction in the market.  Most C++ people 
> will move
> to C++14 rather than D. Most C people will move to Go rather 
> than C++
> or D.

These two developments don't necessarily mean much for D.  C/C++ 
devs are not going to give up their big investments in their 
existing source and knowledge unless D presents some big wins, 
real world success like Sociomantic.  Until then, it's more 
likely that D's traction will come from the new and disaffected.  
If they succeed, C/C++ devs will copy them and switch over, or 
their bosses will make them. ;)

> It doesn't matter that Go may have arrived on a wave of hype, 
> the
> language appealed to some high profile people who did things 
> with it
> and showed how much better it was than the alternatives. For 
> these
> people the alternatives were C and C++. D and Rust are just not 
> in the
> game, though Rust when it gets to 1.0 will have an opportunity.
>  Go
> now has street cred. The biggest angst is now about whether 
> Google
> will pull their funding of the core team.
---snip---
> So D is battling against C++14, Go and Rust for market share, 
> and to
> be honest is failing. This is partly because D is an old 
> language that
> never caught on, but also because it has a lack of "new" 
> marketing and
> a path to traction. Interminable discussion in these mailing 
> lists
> achieves nothing. Trying to tell C and C++ folk they should 
> change to D
> achieves nothing. Having a reputation for internal angst and a 
> bad
> garbage collector achieves huge negative waves. A language 11 
> years
> old and still in the same "breaking change" situation as Rust, 
> yet
> claiming to be production ready isn't helping. Conversely Dub 
> helps
> the D cause, code.dlang.org helps the D cause.
>
> What D needs though is some high profile people doing high 
> profile
> projects to create a sense of newness. This is the lesson D 
> needs to
> take from Go and Rust. Make use of hype rather than just 
> complaining
> about it. Set situations up that can be hyped. Hype is after 
> all just
> over-enthusiastic marketing.

I don't think "high profile people" matter, but yes, D will only 
succeed if it can generate some successful killer apps, ie what 
you call "high profile projects," though I'd add the qualifier of 
actually making money not just getting big investment.

But in the meantime, what you label "interminable discussion" is 
often people trying to figure out how to make D better in the 
interim.  Anytime you're working with other people, you need to 
talk to them first before you go do stuff.  Perhaps many here 
talk too much and don't contribute much code, granted, but a lot 
of it is enthusiasts putting forth their ideas and opinions for 
everyone else to chew on, which can have real value.  Nothing 
wrong with "internal angst," as quality only comes from such 
criticism and reflection, though like anything else, it can be 
overdone.

Sure, actual software like dub often helps more, but that often 
starts with a discussion.

> So what is the D USP on which hype can be hung?

Native efficiency combined with expressiveness and ease of use, 
as the front page says.  That's too general-purpose to just go 
build some specialized app like docker, but in the long run may 
lead to much bigger wins.