static with?

[Idan Arye]

On Sunday, 15 December 2013 at 17:30:03 UTC, Orvid King wrote:
> Your missing it's meaning when used on imports, which requires 
> you to use the full module name to access it's members.

Good point - I guess it already is a whore keyword...

> On the topic of static with, perhaps modifying with to accept a 
> type as it's argument would be enough?

Care to elaborate? I don't see how `with(<type>)` can supply the 
original functionality of `with`, let alone solve the scope 
problem...