Comparison of Sepples and D

D:

no more preprocessor
no more headers
faster compilation
order of declaration is not important, no need to predeclare
a name conflict when importing modules with the same identifier trigger an error. Impossible to use the wrong symbol unknowingly.
no more implicit conversion of arrays to pointers
++pre and post-increment++ have been fixed
ranges are simpler to implement than iterators
the D STL is actually readable
move and copy semantics radically simplified
array slices are supported at the langage levels (pointer carrying their length), more bounds-checking ensues
C++ code is unittested at great pains : unit tests have been made a builtin
documentation comments are builtin to avoid the need for an external tool that inevitably no-one uses
D has a package manager, C++ has none that is popular in its community
stack variables / members are initialized by default. This fact alone would have saved me months of debugging C++ code
lexing stage separated from parsing stage separated from semantics
easier and more powerful templates that allow the average programmer to create meta-programs routinely
productivity generally increased by the GC
saner operator overloading

Sepples:

C++ seems a bit more thorough and specified
C++ story for resources is better

>>4
The Unix philosophy emphasizes building short, simple, clear, modular, and extensible code that can be easily maintained and repurposed by developers other than its creators. The Unix philosophy favors composability as opposed to monolithic design.