Is D really that bad?

[Bioinfornatics]

On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 12:49:01 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 1 November 2022 at 12:08:46 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
>> I'm 2.2669% sure that would make D trend
>
> That's the bare minimum for an alternative system level 
> language in 2022+.

Here is the problem D was designed originaly to be an application 
language (general purpose) as C++.
To be fast as C++ without its difficulty.

That is why D own a GC from the beginning ...

I do not understand why they are so many user that want to 
transform Dlang to transform it while they are C, Go, Rust, Swift 
...

I follow D since is v1 where the community was divided between 
two main library Phobos and tango.

Now, to me D have to normalize/standardize its syntax.

1. Choose its defaults as, mutable or immutable | @gc or @nogc | 
async, await vs fiber etc...
2. Release a v3
3. Follow the spirit of general propose language by adding more 
features into the standard library
+ Java do the cofee
+ Python is battery included
And so on ...
4. Promote some killer libraries (Gsoc is a good way to see those 
libraries as it is cuurently done). But they need to survive to 
this events, be maintained or added to the the std library.
What is the state of d dataframe? Mir ? D ai ? D web framework 
back and front included through wasm ?

To me, the community have to create those libraries instead to 
complain in order to transform an application language to a 
system language.