Which language constructs could be done as a library if we accept some breaking changes?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Monday, 29 November 2021 at 11:38:17 UTC, rumbu wrote:
> And consequentely we can rename it "!" instead of "D".

I understand your concern, but the crux is to provide syntactical 
sugar. D already does this for user-defined operators, so it is a 
matter of coming up with something equally useful for other 
constructs than operators.

The advantage is that in meta-programming you can ignore all the 
syntactical sugar and deal only with the minimal core language.

(Syntactical sugar disappears after the AST has been built.)