Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[Andrew Godfrey via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 8 July 2016 at 20:11:11 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> But yeah, D *has* overloaded the "static" keyword perhaps a 
> little more than it ought to have.  But at the end of the day 
> it's just syntax... there are far more pressing issues to worry 
> about than syntax at the moment.
> T

Okay, so now you are illustrating the *exact* problem I am trying 
to point out with this thread: Without trying to undo the 
mistakes of the past, could we please have a link (in the vision 
doc) to a long-term language-design vision, so that potential 
adopters know what to expect in 5 years or 10 years?
If by then, D will be as unwieldy as C++ is now, then it isn't 
the improvement over C++ that it currently appears to be.

"More pressing issues" is what the current vision doc is about, 
and I'm not suggesting substantial changes to it. Except for the 
time it may take the leadership to write down their long term 
intentions and - possibly as an outcome of that - to resolve 
their differences.

I also think it could increase efficiency in the forums; any 
language proposal which violates the long term vision could be 
referred to that doc instead of clumsily exploring little bits of 
it.