Can we drop static struct initializers?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Don wrote:
> Now that we have struct literals, the old C-style struct initializers 
> don't seem to be necessary.
> The variations with named initializers are not really implemented -- the 
> example in the spec doesn't work, and most uses of them cause compiler 
> segfaults or wrong code generation. EG...
> 
> struct Move{
>    int D;
> }
> enum Move genMove = { D:4 };
> immutable Move b = genMove;
> 
> It's not difficult to fix these compiler problems, but I'm just not sure 
> if it's worth implementing. Maybe they should just be dropped? (The { 
> field: value } style anyway).

Would love to. At least we can deprecate them and not mention them in TDPL.

Andrei