minwin

[Walter Bright]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> The bottom line is, just because D doesn't have negative version checks, 
> doesn't mean the need for them will go away.  It just means that
>   "version(X){}else"
> becomes the spelling of "!version".  I'd personally rather see 
> !version(X) or not_version(X) than version(X){}else.

Or perhaps rethink why there is a negative version called X in the first 
place. For example, if you want:

	version (!FULL) { }

it would perhaps be better to redo the version as:

	version (EMPTY) { }

I've been through this with my own code, and it definitely improves the 
readability to think in positive features rather than negative features. 
Something about how human perception works. Long ago I read that there's 
some research to back this up.

For example,

	version (NOFLOAT) => version (INTONLY)
	version (NOTWINDOWS) => version (LINUX)