DIP58: ".." as a Binary Operator

[Asman01]

On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 07:56:20 UTC, Mason McGill wrote:
> I just wrote a DIP aimed at improving slicing and range 
> construction syntax while maintaining backwards compatibility, 
> and I'd like to hear your opinions!
> http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP58
>
> It can be thought of as an elaboration on the approach 
> discussed here:
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mailman.551.1365290408.4724.digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com
>
> And an alternative to the approach discussed here:
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/upzdamhmxrrlsexgcdva@forum.dlang.org#post-ncwqaixkgbgycybvpkgj:40forum.dlang.org
>
> I think the issue of appealing to numerical programmers is 
> worth some attention because there's a distinct niche that D is 
> frustratingly close to filling.  In my field, researchers will 
> often write scripts in a dynamic language, publish, iterate, 
> and eventually re-write their software in C++ and release it as 
> a library.  The re-writing step is a large time investment, but 
> it's important because
>
>   - Dynamic languages are either slow (MATLAB/Python/R) or 
> immature (Julia).
>   - Other researchers may prefer another dynamic language, but 
> every relevant dynamic language can interface with native 
> libraries.
>
> D already has the speed and modeling power of C++, GC for clean 
> API design, and reflection for automatic bindings, but it's 
> missing a few key features required to make something like 
> NumPy or the Julia standard library possible in D.  I believe 
> DIP58 provides those features, and accepting DIP58 will make D 
> a competitive alternative to the prototype/test/rewrite/release 
> cycle.
>
> On another note, I'm pretty new to D and the community, so let 
> me know if there's any protocol I should follow with respect to 
> DIPs and I'll get on it!
>
> Cheers,
> Mason

Looks like Pascal stuff to me...