Which language futures make D overcompicated?

[Timon Gehr]

On 15.02.2018 21:38, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 2/10/2018 4:35 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> In summary, the issue is that there is only one 'inout' and therefore 
>> it is not properly lexically scoped. It is a bit like having a 
>> language where all variables are implicit function parameters and they 
>> all have the same, global, name. This sort of works fine until you 
>> want a function with two parameters or until you want to nest 
>> functions in a non-trivial way.
> 
> This needs to be filed on bugzilla. Shall I do it, or do you want to?

I had already filed the concrete counterexamples:

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17743
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17744

Should there be more?