Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.



Last active Feb 18, 2019
What would you like to do?
D Issue List

D Issue List

This is a list of issues I encounter when working with the D programming language, and which I find annoying or which limit what I can do with D.

The selection of these issues is completely subjective, I keep it here for personal reference and possibly for others who might want to fix one of these problems or just want to know about the problems I see with D.

Despite all of the issues, I think D is a useful language, otherwise I wouldn't use it and put effort in fixing (or working around) flaws, or even creating this list.

If you spot an error in the list or want to correct something, please ping me about it!

I also categorized the problems into:

  • Problems which prevent proper inclusion of D into Linux distributions (Debian specifically) - (marked with πŸ“¦)
  • Problems which prevent me from achieving some goal in D, or making doing certain things a lot harder (marked with πŸ”΄)
  • Problems which are very annoying, but don't actually prevent achieving a goal (e.g. style issues) (marked with πŸŒ€)

If you are just interested in the "how to integrate D into distributions" issue and want a priorized list with those issues, you might want to take a look at the more condensed list.

Language Issues

  • Function decorator bloat: I recently tagged a function @property @nogc pure @safe override which seems a bit much. (This is just a minor annoyance though, usually this is within limits, especially since you can set some of those as global per-unit - having @safe as default would still be awesome though!) [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • The assert statement is "dumb" in a way that it doesn't show me what data it actually compared, making using pure-assert in unittests a very cumbersome task. Pretty much every slightly bigger project I have see wraps assert in some other function to display useful information about the specific check. I would consider a useful-by-default assert statement to be very valuable, especially because it could show much more and nicer information and we could all drop our workarounds. [ πŸŒ€ ]

Compiler issues


  • D has no stable ABI. This kind of enforces recompiling all D shared libraries and binaries in a Linux distribution with every new compiler version. It also means that you can not use the libraries which were compiled with LDC in an application that is compiled with GDC and vice versa. This is a real PITA for distros and users who might have binaries compiled with the "wrong" compiler. [ πŸ“¦ ]


  • DMD has a non-free backend (open source, but no free software) and is the reference-compiler of D. DMD being non-free means that I will never ever be able to use it, since I want my software to be available in Linux distributions, and I also don't like extra legal obstacles which make using the compiler harder. DMD being non-free also makes it incredibly hard to sell D in the FLOSS community. Because of that, I can not actually test my code with dmd and use a free compiler instead, which means that I don't benefit from improvements done in druntime, Phobos and other parts of D as quickly as others. (IMHO a free compiler (LDC?) should be the reference compiler) [ πŸ“¦,πŸŒ€ ]

  • No Make/Ninja compatible depfile generation - this is especially important when not using dub (see the dub issues) and some other build system (Automake/CMake/Meson/..) is used instead. See [ πŸŒ€ ]


  • LDC doesn't support a lot of architectures / architecture support breaks from time to time. This makes it slightly harder to package the compiler in Debian. (see for a bug report, build logs are here: [ πŸ“¦ ]

  • LDC doesn't support gcc command-line options. This would be very helpful to make LDC integrate better with Debian (e.g. it could pick up new default hardening flags quickly). It would also make me open the LDC manpage less to see how a certain flag was named.... ;-) [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • No working Make/Ninja compatible depfile generation - this is especially important when not using dub (see the dub issues) and some other build system (Automake/CMake/Meson/..) is used instead. See [ πŸŒ€ ]


  • GDC only supports an ancient version of the D standard library, which has many nice classes and also bugfixes missing. Because of that, it is almost impossible to compile modern D applications with GDC, and when developing an own application, I always need to add support for GDC explicitly, which means I sometimes can't use certain features. Thisn is an issue LDC doesn't have, and which is fragmenting the D ecosystem. [ πŸ”΄,πŸ“¦ ]

  • GDC is not part of official GCC. This makes it difficult to ship it with some Linux distributions, e.g. Fedora. On Debian, we inject GDC into the GCC build, which is also a bit weird. Having GDC in GCC proper would also give D more visibility (being in GCC still means something). [ πŸ“¦ ]

  • GDC does not support creating shared libraries at time, which is a big deal for distros which need it to reduce duplicate code and make security fixes easier. [ πŸ“¦ ]


  • There is no dub install command ( [ πŸ“¦,πŸŒ€ ]

  • dub test overrides binary created by dub build ( [ πŸ“¦,πŸŒ€ ]

  • Dub doesn't use packages installed to system locations ( [ πŸ”΄,πŸ“¦,πŸŒ€ ]

  • Can not version dependencies on other libraries ( [ πŸ”΄,πŸŒ€ ]

  • Dub always recompiles the whole project, insread of just the parts that changed, like a normal Makefile does. When using dmd this is not an issue, since dmd is very fast, but with LDC and GDC it is and makes for a slower development process. [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • Doesn't allow us to custom build parameters externally via an env var or the dub command-line (there is no "plain" build-type) [ πŸ“¦ ]

  • Dub is unfit for complex projects: If I want to build a shared library and multiple binaries depending on it, edit files as part of the build process, un arbitrary commands to create a certain target and install the result into a directory, dub is not up to the task at all. I don't know if we need a dub-compatible more complex build system (Reggae? Meson?) or if dub can be enhanced to work for these cases. [ πŸ”΄,πŸŒ€ ]


  • std.json: Why is there no boolean data type? Needing to check whether the type is TYPE_TRUE makes uglier code and is also very inconsistent given that an uinteger, integer and string type exists. [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • The download() function doesn't throw errors, while the get() function does, which makes the former really useless (you never know if the download actually succeeded, or whether you downloaded a 404 page or nothing at all). Also, it is impossible to set timeouts via AutoProtocol, you basically need to work with HTTP/FTP primitives to get functionality which is even only slightly more advanced. [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • std.xml: Deprecated, but there is no replacement available yet - so what should I use to be future-proof? [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • There is no standard I/O streams interface anymore. says it's deprecated, without offering me any alternative that should be used instead (I heard some rumour about being in progress, but that doesn't seem to be ready yet) [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • There is no "Set" type in the standard lib. Faking one using an associative array is a bit ugly. [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • The Phobos online docs and the reality are sometimes worlds apart, especially in the case of GDC, which makes using the docs a lot harder and less reliable. The online docs are only true for the latest DMD release, but you might actually be using an older LDC or GDC. This is very annoying when learning D. [ πŸŒ€ ]


  • Named unittests blocks would be awesome, to see which test is running right now. [ πŸŒ€ ]

  • points out cases where the unittests block isn't the best fit, but it offers no alternative on how unittests should be done in the D world in that case (ideally with dub integration). Having a basic test framework in Phobos would be very useful. [ πŸŒ€ ]


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@JackStouffer JackStouffer commented Dec 21, 2016

"Set" can be replicated via RedBlackTree with allowDuplicates = false


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@dejlek dejlek commented Dec 21, 2016

"GDC only supports an ancient version of the D standard library" -- what??? GDC's Phobos is only a version or two behind...
Speaking about GDC - please convince Fedora people to merge GDC into the GCC and make appropriate RPMs...


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@yshui yshui commented Dec 21, 2016

"Set" can be replicated via RedBlackTree with allowDuplicates = false

Using RedBlackTree changes the time complexity. It's not really an option.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@leandro-lucarella-sociomantic leandro-lucarella-sociomantic commented Dec 23, 2016

Makefile generation can be eased a bit by using rdmd (comes with the standard DMD distribution at least), which can produce makefile dependencies (we are using them in MakD).


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@ibuclaw ibuclaw commented Jan 8, 2017

"GDC only supports an ancient version of the D standard library" -- what??? GDC's Phobos is only a version or two behind...

Sadly, a year in D community is only 3 months, and breaking changes are added at breakneck speed. As for bugs, I don't see anyone reporting any, if you point these out, the relevant backports can be made.

@ximion - I've heard from doko that Debian has port boxes, I have asked from time to time whether I could have access to some in order to do porting work to get library support for gdc. The same sentiment may also be shared by the ldc too.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner Author

@ximion ximion commented Jan 14, 2017

@.all: I only now saw the comments here, sorry for not getting back earlier.

@ibuclaw: Giving external developers access to porterboxes is possible, I need to look what the process for that is though. LDC and GDC would definitely benefit from that (I'll get back to you about this).

@dejlek: Fedora/RHEL don't want to add the packages until they are part of the official GDC, last time I asked someone about it. @ibuclaw, is getting GDC into the official GCC something we can expect at some point? Or will GDC always be distributed separately?


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@Space-Ant Space-Ant commented Jul 15, 2017

The DMD backend is now open-source.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@truedat101 truedat101 commented Feb 20, 2018

@ximion this is a great list. D needs a wider community working on things outside of core. Those aren't things to bring to discussion forums because they are often outside of core stuff. And you've also listed some great things that probably best get resolved in the discussion forums. I created a project to track various things that I've thought of as well, and in discussion with others at our local dlang meetup. Visit here: . I'll admit I track these issues intermittently on my own, and I occasionally get interesting feedback and new issues reported. It's been a bit of a wall on certain things about a project that should be obvious. My personal biggest beef has been slow to get support for AARCH64 processors. Nice work on categorizing the issues with icons.


This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@rsheasby rsheasby commented Feb 18, 2019

]dub test overrides binary created by dub build (
This was fixed not long after the issue was created. Maybe remove this line?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment