with for reduced bloat

[Michelle Long]

On Monday, 24 December 2018 at 02:13:45 UTC, Jonathan Marler 
wrote:
> On Monday, 24 December 2018 at 02:04:26 UTC, Michelle Long 
> wrote:
>> enum X { A, B, C}
>>
>> void foo(X x);
>>
>> foo(X.A);
>>
>>
>> vs
>>
>>
>> enum X { A, B, C}
>>
>> void foo(with X x);
>>
>> foo(A);
>
> You could even support this by default, without requiring 
> `with`. It could break code but it's probably rare that symbols 
> passed to an enum argument collide with members of the enum 
> itself, i.e.
>
> const A = X.B;
> Foo(A); // this is probably rare

This could still be valid. It is the proper type. With is just 
for name resolution. Essentially the compiler just prefixes the 
passed symbol with the enum given but if it knows it is already 
of the correct type then it can just use that.

> But we would have to decide which one to give precedence, the 
> enum member scope or the the current scope.

I think it only makes sense to use the enum in the function 
signature since that is the desired one. If it does not match at 
the call site then an error is thrown.