Moving back to .NET

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 13:15:38 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 10:18:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>> If you want to know what D is in details, see dlang.org for 
>> language spec.
>
> No, that is backwards. :-) The language spec is the product. 
> What is needed is a definition of what the problem area is 
> (e.g. use cases).
>
> problem area -> design -> language spec

Where do you think is a limit to applicability of a 
turing-complete language?

>> Semantic significance is that classes are polymorphic and 
>> hence reference types, structs are value types.
>
> Not real difference regarding pointers.

Pointers are of little use for a type that is always reference 
type.

>>> - Get rid of all gc-dependent language features.
>>
>> @nogc
>
> No, remove them from the language and replace them with library 
> friendly constructs.

Make them not compile? @nogc does exactly that.
Reducing GC usage and emscripten backend are actionable if you 
want to work on them.