Short list with things to finish for D2

[retard]

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:35:18 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> grauzone wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> The rewrite is done long after lexing, so no low-level problems there.
>> 
>> Oh, I thought it would let you introduce new operators. But it's only
>> about the existing ones.
>> 
>> I find the idea to identify the operator using a string very sloppy and
>> sillyl just like using string mixins for small delegates in
>> std.algorithm etc.; but you'd probably say "it works and is useful" and
>> "it's short" and "it solves the current problem", so... whatever.
> 
> We're trying to improve on the current situation, which forces the user
> to manually define a lot of small functions. If you have convincing
> reasons to argue that the current state of affairs is actually better,
> I'm all ears - both Walter and I could use less work, particularly if
> the outcome sucks (see e.g. T[new]). Also, if you have ideas on how
> things could be done in a way that you'd find not sloppy and not silly,
> that would be even better.

Does the new system allow overriding only some binary operations and not 
all of them at once? I thought generic member functions were non-virtual?