UCFS does not work for nested functions?

[bauss]

On Monday, 18 June 2018 at 17:16:29 UTC, aliak wrote:
> On Monday, 18 June 2018 at 14:19:30 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
> wrote:
>> On 6/18/18 7:16 AM, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 18 May 2014 at 08:15:08 UTC, Steffen Wenz wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Just noticed that using UFCS does not work for nested 
>>>> functions, and was wondering whether that's intended, and 
>>>> what the rationale behind it is:
>>> 
>>> I just had the same question.
>>> 
>>> I can imagine that the context pointer of nested functions 
>>> complicates things, but making `bar` `static` does not help. 
>>> Has anything changed in recent years regarding the difficulty 
>>> of implementing UFCS for nested functions? Would it be easier 
>>> to only support static nested functions?
>>> 
>>> ```
>>> void main() {
>>>      static void bar(int x) {}
>>> 
>>>      int x;
>>>      x.bar(); // Error: no property 'bar' for type 'int'
>>> }
>>> ```
>>
>> It's never been supported, and likely will not be. I think the 
>> idea is that you can override expected behavior inside by 
>> accidentally defining some function locally with the same name.
>>
>> -Steve
>
> Wondering how this is different than with non-nested functions? 
> If a global function has the same name as a member function 
> then the member function takes precedence. So wouldn't the same 
> thing just apply here if it were supported?
>
> Cheers,
> - Ali

I second this.