mixin + CTFE, to big a hammer??

[Hasan Aljudy]

John Reimer wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 14:03:27 -0700, Hasan Aljudy wrote:
> 
>> John Reimer wrote:
>>> On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 13:29:30 -0700, Hasan Aljudy wrote:
>>>
>>>> kris wrote:
>>>>> BCS wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> D mixin, in it's current guise, is about equivalent to crack-cocaine. 
>>>>> Easily the worst thing that happened to the language, IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just say no
>>>> Just give it time, wait for it to mature from experience.
>>> ??
>>>
>>> It's been around for a bit already. It doesn't seem to be getting better?
>>>
>>> -JJR
>> um, it's only been around for 2 versions ...
>>
>> I'm not in a position to say this, but keep using and testing it, report 
>> problems and suggest improvements.
> 
> 
> Two versions?? 
> 
> I meant mixins... I was referring to mixin's alone, not CTFE.
> mixin's aren't the loveliest or most reliable feature to enter the D
> arsenal. And it's unfortunate if the language ends up adopting the mixin
> syntax as a base for experimenting with certain features.
> 
> -JJR

well, mixins are 3 versions old ... not to be confused with template 
mixins, which is a totally different thing.