Public outcry against new .init behaviour

[Jason House]

Kristian Kilpi wrote:
> I fail to see how this is a matter of consistency. To me, it's a matter 
> of definition:
> 't.init' means the initialization value of the *variable* 't'.
> 'T.init' means the initialization value of the *type* 'T'.


I'd vote for this too.  I liked the old t.init functionality.  Having 
T.init *should* be enough.  worst case scenario, someone must do 
typeof(t).init if they really want that and are deep in generic code.