Fully dynamic d by opDotExp overloading

[Christopher Wright]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Christopher Wright wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Cool! I suggest the rewrite:
>>>
>>> c.unknownmethod(args) -> c.opDotExp!("unknownmethod")(args)
>>>
>>> That way you have the option of handling the method name statically 
>>> or dynamically.
>>
>> How would that allow you to handle the method name dynamically, if 
>> you're passing it as a template argument?
>>
>> You mean that the *callee* can be dynamic. However, the *caller* cannot. 
> 
> Of course. It makes no sense to ask for integrated syntax with a 
> variable string. Think of it for a minute.

It standardizes a system for dynamic method dispatch with arguments 
generated at runtime or compile time. For arguments generated at compile 
time, it provides syntactic sugar.

Yours standardizes a system for dynamic method dispatch with arguments 
generated at compile time, and provides syntactic sugar. It also 
provides some minor opportunities for partial compile-time checking for 
these arguments.

In the end, I think that standardization of the runtime portions isn't 
so important. I accede.