Deprecate C style declerations?

[Hasan Aljudy]

Gregor Richards wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>> "Chris Nicholson-Sauls" <ibisbasenji at gmail.com> wrote in message 
>> news:emcekr$2sah$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>>
>>> Should we do this?  As in cause:
>>>
>>> # int foo[];
>>> # int bar*;
>>>
>>> And others to issue deprecation errors.  I think it would be a good 
>>> idea, and shouldn't break extern(C) declarations, so long as one 
>>> doesn't try to mix types.  (I don't think we can mix them in the C 
>>> way at all, anyhow. Haven't tried, though.)
>>
>>
>> I agree, though
>>
>> int bar*;
>>
>> isn't legal any way you slice it, D or C.
>>
>> I'd also be interested in phasing out the C-style function pointer 
>> syntax:
>>
>> int (*foo)(int, int);
>> =>
>> int function(int, int) foo;
>>
>>
>>> Or else change the rules such that array/pointer decoration applies 
>>> to the variable and not the type -- and correct me if I'm wrong about 
>>> this not being the current behavior.
>>>
>>> # int num   ,
>>> #     arr[] ,
>>> #     ptr*  ;
>>>
>>> vs
>>>
>>> # int   num ;
>>> # int[] arr ;
>>> # int*  ptr ;
>>
>>
>> I think that C "feature" was dropped in D because it makes multiple 
>> declarations harder to read.
>>
> 
> Hear-hear! No need for C's crummy array syntax. Writing support for 
> outputting the right C types in bcd.gen was a huge PITA because of it X_X
> 
> Hear-hear particularly to deprecating the C function syntax. That syntax 
> makes me want to gag myself with a spoon.
> 
>  - Gregor Richards

Hear hear ..!
I know how you feel!!
I tried to open this subject before, but didn't get anywhere ..