Which language futures make D overcompicated?

[Guillaume Piolat]

On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated. 
> Go have a lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But 
> some D futures make it very hard to learning.
>
> Small list by me:
> 1. mixins
> 2. inout
> 3. too many attributes like: @safe @system @nogc etc
>
> Which language futures by your opinion make D harder?

Is D really over-complicated? I'm not really sure.

As someone who writes a bit about corner-cases and traps, I feel 
that there isn't nearly enough content to author an "Effective D" 
book.

However I feel like D is very long to learn because, like a 
control panel with many buttons, you have to become intimate with 
every feature and where to apply them - and D has a lot of 
buttons. For example when to use "alias this" is a blurry 
judgement call that have to be finetuned.

It's a long integrative process to use D effectively, but you can 
mostly write useful programs from day one which I think is 
interesting.

Of course I've a personal list of things that could be removed, 
but let's bet it won't match anybody else's kill list :)