What are the worst parts of D?

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 9/23/14, 11:32 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 14:29:06 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> […] and a lack of attention paid to tightening up what we've already
>> got and deprecating old stuff that no one wants any more.
>
> This. The hypocritical fear of making breaking changes (the fact that
> not all of them are bad has been brought up over and over again by some
> of the corporate users) is crippling us, making D a much more cluttered
> language than necessary.
>
> Seriously, once somebody comes up with an automatic fixup tool, there is
> hardly any generic argument left against language changes. Sure, there
> will always be some cases where manual intervention is still required,
> such as with string mixins. But unless we have lost hope that the D
> community is still to grow significantly, I don't see why the burden of
> proof should automatically lie on the side of those in favor of cleaning
> up cruft and semantical quirks.
>
> Most D code is still to be written.

Well put. Again, the two things we need to work on are C++ compatibility 
and the GC. -- Andrei