Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 9 July 2016 at 08:39:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> Seems that in order to make it useful, users had to extend it. 
> This doesn't fit the criteria.

Scheme is a simple functional language which is easy to extend. 
Why would you conflate "useful" with "used for writing complex 
programs"?

Anyway, there are many other examples, but less known.

> Wirth's Pascal had the same problem. He invented an elegant, 
> simple, consistent, and useless language. The usable Pascal 
> systems all had a boatload of dirty, incompatible extensions.

I am not sure if Pascal is elegant, but it most certainly is 
useful. So I don't think I agree with your definition of "useful".


> What programmers think of as "intuitive" is often a collection 
> of special cases.

I think I would need examples to understand what you mean here.