On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 at 20:51:43 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 at 20:31:33 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 January 2016 at 09:00:17 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
The response from the D community seems to be an overwhelming
"It's fine as is" when it's obviously not. Which is making me
question sinking more time into D if there actually is no
cohesive plan to make D an actual C++ competitor rather than
a toy language as it currently stands.
I can't take any of this seriously as long as ConcernedDev1950
do not provide any PR.
ConcernedDev1950 will go use a language that doesn't require
them to write the standard library.
Apparently no, they come here and cry and get nothing done.
