DIP66 has been approved contingent to a few amendments as noted

[eles via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 27 December 2014 at 16:44:35 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> You can't speak about resurrecting language without considering 
> costs of resurrecting the toolchain - unless one wants to write 
> programs exclusively with pen and paper of course.

That's true, because the gap in developping the toolchain 
accumulated. The alternative would be to stall D2 at the current 
language state and start D3 with the main target being the memory 
management pardigm.

I kinda doubt that RC and other management techniques will 
integrate smoothly into D2. And is not the breakages that I worry 
about, it is that the language could become a behemoth with many 
legs and no head. That is, will loose streamilness.

> But I do recognize the troll pattern now, thanks.

With all respect, but you are looking into a mirror while taking 
it for a window.