D as A Better C?

[Chris]

On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 19:43:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> I've toyed with this idea for a while, and wondered what the 
> interest there is in something like this.
>
> The idea is to be able to use a subset of D that does not 
> require any of druntime or phobos - it can be linked merely 
> with the C standard library. To that end, there'd be a compiler 
> switch (-betterC) which would enforce the subset.
>
> (First off, I hate the name "better C", any suggestions?)

-DinC (= D Inc.)
-bareD
-Dwalk (as opposed to D run(time)) ouch!

(Disclaimer: I haven't read all comments, the names might already 
have been suggested)


> What do you think?

I like the idea.