Andrei's list of barriers to D adoption

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 6 June 2016 at 08:15:42 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 19:20 -0700, Walter Bright via 
> Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> […]
>> 
>> * The garbage collector eliminates probably 60% of potential 
>> users right off.
>
> And i bet over 80% of them are just saying this based on zero 
> evidence, just prejudice.
>
> Go went with the attitude "Go has a GC, if you cannot deal with 
> that #### off". Many people did exactly that and the Go 
> community said "byeeee". Arrogant this may have been, but Pike, 
> Cox, et al. stuck to their guns and forged a community and a 
> niche for the language. This then created traction. Now GC in 
> Go is not an issue.

GC in Go is not an issue, because in Go the concurrent GC is 
basically what it has to offer in addition to builtin decent HTTP 
and cloud-server adoption.

GC is Go would have been a big big issue if Go was not designed 
for it or tried to present itself as a system level programming 
language.

For performance you would still not use Go, you would use either 
C++ or Rust. But few servers in the cloud need those extra 20%.