JRM wrote:
> you could write:
> sort!(@1>@2)(x);
[...]
> I think this idea (or something similar) is worth consideration. It is
> simply a small extension to an already existing feature that would give D
> a terser syntax for lambda's than most of the other languages we've been
> discussing.
but:
sort!("a>b")(x);
is just as short! And it already works.