Why not?

[Walter Bright]

Daniel Keep wrote:
> isn't much more typing, and makes it explicit what's going on.  Consider
> it from a maintenance perspective: with this addition, you can't
> actually tell what's being called.  Is it that foo function there, or is
> there another overload somewhere in the imports that takes those
> arguments?  There should be a very good reason for having any form of
> "magic" syntax.

C++ has such conversions, and the trouble happens when there are two 
many possible conversions. One loses track of what is happening.