C++17

[Ola Foaheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 02:59:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 January 2016 at 00:46:00 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
>
>> Yes, how dare people see D marketed as a non-alpha language 
>> then realize the language is actually still in an alpha-state.
>
> It's not in an alpha state. It's a grassroots language. There's 
> no other way to describe it. Being community driven, it moves 
> in the direction and at the pace that the community drives it.

That's not actually true, Walter ultimately decides everything. 
Lisp might have been grassroot, but only because it is 100% 
library driven. Leading to Common Lisp, Common Music etc...

> There's no large team, no governing body, no committee to drive 
> development. Everyone using it needs to accept that any 
> particular personal peeve they have with the language are only 
> going to get changed in one of two ways: there's enough 
> momentum behind it to cause it to percolate up to the top of 
> the priority list for the core developers, or if you do it 
> yourself. That's what it boils down to.

The point of this thread is that D would benefit from cutting the 
scope of no-gc management to deliver on time and gain momentum 
and build a larger team.

It is about strategy. Telling people "DIY" or "submit PR" is off 
topic. That is not a viable strategy that can make D converge 
towards completion in a timely manner.

> Debate about which issues should take priority are certainly 
> needed, but these threads that degenerate into bashing the core 
> developers, or calling D a "toy" language, serve no purpose 
> other than to waste bandwidth and make it difficult to discuss 
> what really matters.

People read too much into "toy language". Many toy languages are 
better and more advanced than non-toy languages. They are just 
not designed and developed in a manner that lead to completion 
and often lack a formal specification.

Some might argue that without a specfication you don't even have 
a language, you have an experimental prototype that could lead to 
a specified language. If it is impossible to implement a fully 
compatible D compiler without studying DMD it basically means 
that nobody knows what the D language is.