What are the worst parts of D?

[monarch_dodra via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 16:54:08 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 9/20/14, 7:42 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
>> On Saturday, 20 September 2014 at 12:39:23 UTC, Tofu Ninja 
>> wrote:
>>> What do you think are the worst parts of D?
>>
>> Oh another bad part of D is the attribute names with some being
>> positive(pure) and some being negative(@nogc) and some of them 
>> not
>> having an @ on them.
>
> If that's among the worst, yay :o).
>
> My pet peeves about D gravitate around the lack of a clear 
> approach to escape analysis and the sometimes confusing 
> interaction of qualifiers with constructors.
>
> For escape analysis, I think the limited form present inside 
> constructors (that enforces forwarded this() calls to execute 
> exactly once) is plenty fine and should be applied in other 
> places as well.

I think correct escape analysis + @safe + scope == win.

BTW, remember all those people that bitch about rvalue to "const 
ref". D could be a language that provides rvalue to scope ref. 
100% safe and practical. How awesome would that be?