Could D have fit Microsoft's needs?

[Mike Franklin]

On Thursday, 18 July 2019 at 23:00:03 UTC, bauss wrote:
> Microsoft has published article about needing a safer system 
> programming language.
>
> https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2019/07/18/we-need-a-safer-systems-programming-language/
>
> Could D (Most likely as betterC) have fit into that domain OR 
> is it not yet safe?

I knew this day would come, and while I hoped in my heart it 
would be D, I understand why it isn't.

I speculate this is an inflection point in the industry.  Walter 
himself even predicted it with his "memory safety will kill C" 
prediction at DConf a couple of years ago.  Others will likely 
follow, and I dread the day my employer comes to me and says "Do 
you know Rust?".

I think D could meet Microsoft's needs, but only if they forked 
it and made some fundamental changes to remove the technical 
debt, remove some of the "weird sh**" 
(https://youtu.be/TkNep5zHWNw?t=1378), and a number of other 
things we all could list to make using D a more professional 
experience.  The D Language Foundation is doing some of that with 
the copy constructors, the new object hierarchy, templating 
druntime, etc. but it all happens too slowly.  Regardless, I will 
continue with my part, at least for the time being, but it is an 
opportune time for some self-reflection.

Microsoft isn't the industry, so there could potentially be 
another major player that decides to use D (or fork it), and that 
could rescue the trend, but it seems unlikely to me, 
unfortunately.

It's sad news to me, really.  I wanted something like D to be the 
new trend, but Rust seemed to have its act together from the 
beginning.

Mike