The new core.sys.windows

[Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 15 October 2015 at 01:51:50 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 21:52:05 UTC, Vladimir 
> Panteleev wrote:
>
>
>> For example: usage of named enums. In C, all enums (or 
>> #defines) all live within the name namespace, with a prefix 
>> serving as the disambiguating "namespace", and all are 
>> implicitly convertible to each other. In many places, the 
>> bindings use named enums instead, which provides the advantage 
>> of strong typing - if a function accepts a parameter of a 
>> certain enum, you cannot accidentally pass a member of another 
>> enum.
>>
>
> I think named enums are a bad idea. For one thing, it's 
> inconsistent with the other system modules. For another, it's a 
> pain point for porting existing C code to D. If they are kept, 
> then at the very least aliases ought to be provided.

Well, aliases would allow both C source compatibility and strong 
typing. Plus, it won't be a breaking change, so they can be added 
whenever. Now that we don't need to support D1, this can be done 
with a mixin OSLT.