"body" keyword is unnecessary

[piotrek]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:04:25 +0100, Don wrote:

> piotrek wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 21:37:12 +0800, KennyTM~ wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mar 24, 11 19:00, sclytrack wrote:
>>>> == Quote from piotrek (starpit at tlen.pl)'s article
>>>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 23:17:32 +0100, Alvaro wrote:
>>>>>> D already has a long list of keywords, reserved words can't be used
>>>>>> as identifiers, which can be annoying. "body" in particular is a
>>>>>> common noun that programmers would gladly use as a variable name in
>>>>>> physics simulation, astronomy, mechanics, games, health, etc. I
>>>>>> think "body" can be removed from D with no harm, and with the
>>>>>> benefit of allowing the name as identifier.
>>>>> yes, please
>>>>> body is also a html tag
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Piotrek
>>>> Copied the following line from the Vala (=mostly reference counted
>>>> language) web page.
>>>>
>>>> "It is possible to use a reserved keyword as identifier name by
>>>> prefixing it with the @ character. This character is not part of the
>>>> name. For example, you can name a method foreach by writing @foreach,
>>>> even though this is a reserved Vala keyword."
>>>>
>>>> My body is hungry and starving.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> How is this better than _body or body_?
>> 
>> I think "@" is a little bit nicer, but it doesn't change the situation
>> at all . body (if possible) shouldn't be a keyword. Can anyone from the
>> steering group state his opinion? :)
> 
> What's the steering group?

I think you belong there. :) Along with Walter, Andrei, Brad and Sean.
Of course support of  David, Steven, Lars and Jonathan and the 
whole community is invaluable. :)

> I raised this exact topic before, with the title "my body is ugly" <g>.
> It's a very silly keyword. It's just a comment, really /*body*/.

What stops Walter from removing it? If it was me, the next dmd 
release would have one keyword less ;) (Forget for a while that
I'm not familiar with the dmd code)

Cheers,
Piotrek