A betterC modular standard library?

[yawniek via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 05:59:07 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko 
wrote:
> D - ??? awesome what ? What do we have better then Scala?
>
> Performance? NO.
> BRandomAccessRanges makes our performance less then C/C++.
>
> Clean and clever API in standard library? NO.
> We are placing our Range API whenever possible including RNGs. 
> We have not a language standard for I/O. Half of Phobos is 
> outdated to language standards.
>
> Best generics? NO.
> Scala is more powerful.
>
> ----------
> What do we have awesome? Where D is the best?
> ----------
> D is awesome for low-level system libraries in betterC mode.
> (and small text processing routines)
> This will make D great in other fields.

while i mostly use D as a awesome high level language (with 
mediocre libs, and an inconsistent stdlib) i also think that D 
has an edge when it comes to building fast system level tools 
that used to be written in c: microservices, datatabases etc.
however for that, as ilya mentioned it needs to be super user 
friendly to compile down a single static object/binary with no 
dependencies and a clear line on when phobos can/should/must be 
used and when not (e.g. create a view on phobos documentation 
that only shows things that work without druntime. add some 
official docs on how to use it)

people turn to C to extend their language of choice because they 
need speed in a very narrow area. if that becomes as easy (or 
even easier, since there is dub!) as with C it would be a huge 
win for D, because people would start to extend their stuff with 
D. No other language is in a such good position as D, from what i 
see not that much needs to be done to make that work.
i see a huge opportunity there