Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[burjui via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 9 July 2016 at 08:57:18 UTC, Observer wrote:
>     constant if
>     durable if
>     persistent if
>     adamant if
>     unalterable if
>     immutable if
>
> Okay, that last one is a joke, considering that we're talking 
> about keyword overloading. But the effort did spark some other 
> brain cells to fire. So we could have had any of these:
>
>     exactly if
>     strictly if
>     only if

I'm sorry, but these examples are horrible, except maybe 
"constant if", because none give a clue about compile-time and 
they are not even synonyms. The last three are just plain 
nonsense, especially "strictly if" which implies that ordinary 
"if" is somehow not reliable. You didn't even think about it, 
just picked the words from a book.

"static if" is perfectly fine, if you just try to imagine what in 
"if" could be dynamic, because the only meaningful answer is: 
"The condition". If there is a context where "static" really 
needs to be replaced by a synonym, it's definitely not "static 
if".