Article calls D "irrelevant"

[Dukc]

On Wednesday, 25 February 2026 at 02:27:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
> https://www.makeuseof.com/why-is-c-programming-language-called-c-what-happened-to-d/
>
> A few years later, a language called Rust appeared which 
> focused heavily on memory safety (the same principle as D), and 
> it managed to capture the attention of the tech world in a way 
> that D never quite managed — and effectively made D irrelevant.

I echo what others have said. Probably this is a shallow take by 
someone who doesn't understand the difference between D and Rust 
well.

And also, that it's about marketing, not about technical 
shortcomings. D is technically rough around the edges compared to 
mainstream languages, but I don't those issues are worse than 
what the mainstream languages had when they were still niche. 
Likely the other way around in many cases!

There are still no mainstream languages that fulfill the raison 
d'atre of D: being equally suitable for application and systems 
programming. Some other niche languages do that - Nim at least - 
but none of those are clearly more popular or more polished than 
D as far as I know.