With statement extension

[deed via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 26 April 2016 at 12:53:49 UTC, deed wrote:
> For example:

A stronger example would be a scope with two similar types, i.e.:

void foo (Matrix matrix, SameType e1, SameType e2)
{
     with (
     M    : matrix.rawArr;
     Ex1  : e1.someProperties.someModulusX,
     Ey1  : e1.someProperties.someModulusY,
     Ex2  : e2.someProperties.someModulusX,
     Ey2  : e2.someProperties.someModulusY,
     v    : e1.someProperties.aRatio)

     foreach (i; ...) foreach (j; ...) {
         M[...] = Ex1 > Ex2 ?
         1/v^^2 * sqrt(v * (Ex1 + Ex2)^^2 + v^^2 * (Ey1 - Ey2)^^2) 
:
         1/v^^2 * sqrt(v * (Ex1 + Ex2)^^2 + v^^2 * (Ey1 + Ey2)^^2) 
;
     }
}

Current with-statement gets you next to nowhere here:

void foo (Matrix matrix, SameType e1, SameType e2)
{
     with (matrix)
     with (e1.someProperties)

     foreach (i; ...) foreach (j; ...) {
         rawArr[...] = e1.someProperties.someModulusX > 
e2.someProperties.someModulusX ?
         1/aRatio^^2 * sqrt( aRatio * 
(e1.someProperties.someModulusX
                                     + 
e2.someProperties.someModulusX)^^2
                           + aRatio^^2 *
                                      
(e1.someProperties.someModulusY
                                     - 
e2.someProperties.someModulusY)^^2) :
         1/aRatio^^2 * sqrt( aRatio * 
(e1.someProperties.someModulusX
                                     + 
e2.someProperties.someModulusX)^^2
                           + aRatio^^2 *
                                      
(e1.someProperties.someModulusY)
                                     + 
e2.someProperties.someModulusY)^^2) ;
     }
}

And let's say it would be much more descriptive to name e1 and e2 
as currentSquare and adjacentTriangle and there you go.. 
Apparently, the two proposed lowerings could boost the 
expressiveness of the language without breakage.