The year is 2019

[Manu]

On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 5:45 PM Exil via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, 27 July 2019 at 22:36:23 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > I think implicit conversions are EXTREMELY enabling for a lot
> > of cases of meta-programming in D, and I also feel much more
> > comfortable with the idea that they are opt-in rather than
> > opt-out as in C++. I think that's the right balance.
>
> I think it'd be even worse with meta programming. Now not only do
> you not know what type you may have, case it can be any type. You
> can also possibly convert it to any other type with implicit
> conversion.

Not quite. I think you mean "you can also INTENTIONALLY convert it to
SELECT other types with implicit conversion".

> This would make it even more difficult to try to read
> and understand what is going on with implicit conversions. It
> could make it more powerful, and have the code be simpler. But
> overall it makes maintainability a pain, especially so since it
> makes the code look simpler, when in reality it is actually far
> more complicated.

I find the bigger pain when I need to insert detection for specific
things into meta-code, because they require a manual conversion step
when the things is something that I'd like to convert implicitly.