Short list with things to finish for D2

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

grauzone wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>>
>>> * Encode operators by compile-time strings. For example, instead of 
>>> the plethora of opAdd, opMul, ..., we'd have this:
>>>
>>> T opBinary(string op)(T rhs) { ... }
>>>
>>> The string is "+", "*", etc.
> 
> I thought the problem with this was that the lexer/parser would have to 
> know about semantics, which is against the goals of the language. Would 
> the operator actually be inside quotes?

It's simpler than that.

a + b

will be rewritten into

a.opBinary!("+")(b)

The rewrite is done long after lexing, so no low-level problems there.

> Anyway, do we _really_ want to make it possible, that valid D code will 
> look like ASCII art?

We want to improve the state of the art. If the attempt risks to end up 
doing the opposite, I'm all ears.


Andrei