> Moving D into GCC proper is problematic for no other reason than that D is a moving target.
Ridiculous comment: C++ and Fortran are also a moving targets: does this mean that we shall remove them from GCC?
> The authors are not formally standardizing the language
1) Lots of language are very useful without having formal standardisation.
> they abandon versions of it,
2) Sigh, that's just a lie: D1's implementation has still lots of bugfix delivered, the latest release of D1 is from Feb 17, 2011, exactly the same date as the latest D2 release..
> and there's no guarantee that tomorrow's D will be anything like today's.
3) Still ridiculous.
> Plus, the D standard library is total crap. It's so much crap that they wrote a completely new one. Which is also total crap. So they're contemplating a third.
This part is somewhat true, written in a trollish way, but yes, D's standard library isn't as good as it should be at this state..