[Issue 1827] New: Uniform syntax for is(), static if, alias, template definition & static assert

Bill Baxter dnewsgroup at billbaxter.com
Tue Feb 12 17:58:02 PST 2008


d-bugmail at puremagic.com wrote:
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1827
> 
>            Summary: Uniform syntax for is(), static if, alias, template
>                     definition & static assert
>            Product: D
>            Version: unspecified
>           Platform: PC
>         OS/Version: All
>             Status: NEW
>           Severity: enhancement
>           Priority: P2
>          Component: DMD
>         AssignedTo: bugzilla at digitalmars.com
>         ReportedBy: aarti at interia.pl
> 
> 
> I decided to put my proposal from news list (posted some time ago) as I think
> it can really improve current situation with templates. After implementing
> quite a big piece of template code I can only say that currently the whole
> system is quite inconsistent, but situation can be easily improved, keeping a
> lot of backward compatibility.
> 
> I did not get any replays for my proposals and it's difficult for me to say
> why:
> - proposal is so bad?
> - proposal is so good, so there is no need to comment on it?
> - no one is interested?

More likely too dense and too hard to understand on a Sunday morning. 
:-) Anything that involves the current template specialization syntax or 
is() syntax just makes my head spin.  Too many meaningless punctuations 
and meaningless variable names strung together with special implied 
meanings.

And secondly, maybe some of us remember discussions about the template 
syntax topic before.  I recall that Andrei had agreed that the current 
syntax sucked but said he was unable to convince Walter to change it. 
If Andrei can't convince Walter that the syntax needs to be changed then 
who can?  There seems little point in debating it.

If Andrei is finally gaining some traction in getting it changed then 
hooray!

--bb


More information about the Digitalmars-d-bugs mailing list