No more implicit conversion real->complex?!

[kris]

Walter Bright wrote:
> "kris" <foo at bar.com> wrote in message news:4420640A.7020208 at bar.com...
> 
>>Even then, one might argue that "compatability" is actually there in name 
>>only. Why would anyone convert a C program to D? I've yet to see an 
>>extensive example of that; no doubt due to the extensive /incompatability/ 
>>of D with .h files (in truth, I haven't seen any examples)
> 
> 
> Take a look at std.md5, std.random, etc. For C++ to D, see std.regexp. 

Thanks. Those do count as /any/ examples, but I called "extensive 
example" doesn't cover such things as md5 and random. Regexp is a better 
example yet is still just one 'module', thus avoiding much of the need 
for numerous .H files. The latter is where the issue lies in what I was 
referring to (as is stated above) ~ larger C projects such as say, an 
XML parser or text editor, are a completely different kettle of fish.

The "compatability" with C is a nice check-mark, but IMO the only real 
benefit is familiarity of syntax. For anything else, said 
"compatability" is seriously limited; to the point of hubris vis-a-vis 
larger C projects. That's just fine though; realistically, there's 
precious little reason to do otherwise.