It's a chicken and egg problem, why would you build tools for a language that's not popular, how will a language become popular without tools.
C++ answered that question by usurping C... or did C backward compatibility poison C++ ...
Python did it by being fun and easy and having great tools and great documentation.
D is not ready yet.
If they could just get together some decent documentation, I would be using D in a snap.
(Correction: The instructions were wrong when I tried to install D about two months ago. It took a trip to the mailing list to sort out.)
here's a D intro for anyone too lazy to google:
Some people seem to dislike the fact that there are the two standard libraries, but I think that just adds to making the learning curve less steep (i.e. you can choose whether you want a closer-to-the-metal or a more high level flavour of the language). Reading code written in different standard libraries in itself can also be quite illuminating.
However, the author does talk about the usual bias of such articles. I wonder if he's similarly biased?
But D is now on the list of things to try out on a rainy day.
D2 certainly sounds refreshingly simple. Having said that I don't fancy rewriting 125 KLOC of Python in even D. My performance critical code uses Cython. I'll have to try to use e.g. PyD (or some newer replacement) to write some code in D to interface with.
In a typical WEB app however there's usually not much stuff you can say: hey, this is totally independent CPU-bound code running for a significant amount of time on a limited set of data that can be written in a lower-level language.
(Oh, I suddenly feel so dirty for upgrading a server from 16 to 32 gigabyte to allow for bloated Python data structures!)