Which language futures make D overcompicated?

[bachmeier]

On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 22:36:19 UTC, Ralph Doncaster wrote:

> While many more things were done right compared to C++, too 
> many things were done wrong and there doesn't seem to be 
> interest in breaking backward compatibility to excise them from 
> D.

I agree. Some users might shout because they recompiled a piece 
of code for the first time in eight years and got an error. The 
users that don't shout are the ones that try out the language, 
see rough edges that should have been removed, and move on.

Enterprise users that want guaranteed language stability should 
pay to support a compiler for that version of the language. 
Archive a version of the compiler every two years and paying 
companies can be guaranteed to use that compiler forever. There's 
no reason to shut down the evolution of the language to satisfy 
one (currently very small) group of users.