Short list with things to finish for D2

[Travis Boucher]

grauzone wrote:
> 
> If I had a better proposal, I'd post it. I'm just saying that's it's a 
> bad hack, that _although_ solves the problem, will have negative side 
> effects for other reasons.
> 
> Does the current proposal make things simpler at all? All you're doing 
> is to enable the programmer to "fix" the clumsy semantics by throwing 
> lots of CTFE onto the problem. Why not generate the operator functions 
> with CTFE in the first place...

 From my point of view (trying different ways of implementing something 
as simple as a vector), this makes things much simpler without 
sacrificing functionality.

Personally, I'd love to see an unknownMethod(string method)(...) thing 
implemented as well, but that might be asking for too much (and might 
sacrifice performance in some cases).