Suggestion : virtual member data

[Kristian]

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 13:58:39 +0300, Steve Horne  
<stephenwantshornenospam100 at aol.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 12:58:14 +0300, Kristian <kjkilpi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree that 'virtual' may not be the best choice for the storage class
>> keyword. 'vtable' doesn't sound quite right either, though.
>
> Yes, but there is a fine tradition to uphold here. Storage class
> keywords must never make any sense!
>
> After all, 'static' only really makes sense if you've used assembler
> in the past. And even then, why isn't there a 'bss' storage class for
> uninitialised static variables? And for C local variables, well,
> 'stack' or 'temporary' I could have understood, but 'auto'!!!!!
>
> Actually, I've changed my mind. The new keyword should be 'magic' or
> 'freaky' or 'scarey' or something like that!
>
> Yes - D could be the first language to support freaky member data!
>
>
> OK, OK - I've been waiting over a year for a shrink - what do you
> expect.


Hehheh, the 'freaky' keyword sounds right, doesn't it! ;)

Well, *if* virtual variables will be implemented in some day (2.0 or 3.0?  
*smile*), I am sure Walter, and the D community, will pick a proper  
keyword for it. (Hmm, I think I'll vote for  
'this_is_a_virtual_variable'... ;) )