extern(C++, ns)

[David Nadlinger via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 19 January 2016 at 13:56:54 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On 19 January 2016 at 18:54, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
>> As the length of this thread testifies, this has been 
>> discussed at length already.
>
> No it hasn't. I don't feel like it's been discussed at all.
> I've explicitly asked both you and Andrei to justify the design
> several times, no less than 5, and you haven't responded a 
> single time
> other than repeating these same points without providing any 
> support
> or evidence.
> Andrei deliberately dodged the request, replying with something 
> like
> "the best way to move forwards is to present code that 
> demonstrates
> bugs". Neither of you appear to be willing to engage in 
> discussion
> relating to the design, or how it's flawed and pointless.
> It looks like you understand there's no objective justification 
> for
> the design. I suspect you just don't want to change it now it's 
> in.

While I am not in the mood for mudslinging or making a heated 
discussion out of this, I have to agree with Daniel and Manu 
here. If I remember correctly, you never really provided any 
justification (including during the original discussion back when 
the feature was introduced) as to why just using the normal means 
of name resolution and disambiguation in D – the module system – 
is not good enough for this.

It's fine if you just say "I had a hunch that the added 
complexity would be worth it by making some situations more 
convenient, even though I can't provide a concrete example". Of 
course that might not be particularly persuasive, but it's your 
call in the end. But if you keep dodging the question, this 
discussion will never come to an end.

  — David