class extensions

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

kris wrote:

> Lutger wrote:
>> kris wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, the proposed extensions raised all kinds of red flags for me at
>>> the conference.
>>>
>>> Bluntly, it felt like the notion of "structured programming" was being
>>> tossed out in favor of "slapdash programming" ... a brand new paradigm
>>> to go along with the other(s) being adopted :)
>> 
>> I liked to idea very much. It gives a flexible way of object-oriented /
>> object-based programming similar to how I often see it implemented in C.
> 
> And it potentially introduces additional namespace issues, hijacking
> issues, and compilation errors for large and/or long-term software
> development projects. The commercial-development space is where D ought
> to target, if it's to rise well above being just another enthusiasts
> playground :p

It will also be directly detrimental to maintainability when used for user
defined types, as you no longer will be able to decide where a function is
implemented by only looking at the call site (given inheritance and
polymorphism this can in cases be difficult enough, but at least you have a
type hierarchy to look to).

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango