Library Typedefs are fundamentally broken

[Wyatt via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 18 September 2014 at 18:02:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
> basically "s++" gets translated to "s.x++", and since S behaves
> basically identically to an int, which means it should get
> enregistered under the same circumstances, the generated machine
> code should be identical to when you wrote "int" instead of "S".
>
Oh, neat.  I stand corrected on that point.  Thanks.

> I don't see why this should have any effect on the cache.
>
That's my mistake; I thought there was overhead for structs in D. 
  Should have done my homework!

It's too bad this does nothing for the usability issues. :/

-Wyatt