Congratulations to the D Team!

[deadalnix]

On 11/07/2012 19:58, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> No, I don't have to do this, your assertion is baseless. The LuaD
> library is fairly complete (though there's still a lot of room for
> higher-level features), and the example posted works fine and will work
> fine for the time being because the aggregate is a struct, not a class,
> and will remain so. I don't have to subvert the type system in that
> module at all.

I don't say you have to. I say, you may need to. Because the language 
you are interfacing with have different semantics.