Get constructor for a class

[Namespace]

On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 22:10:02 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 15:27:42 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 15:16:36 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 04:16:30PM +0200, simendsjo wrote:
>>>> On Friday, 13 September 2013 at 14:02:15 UTC, Gary 
>>>> Willoughby wrote:
>>> [...]
> (...)
>>>
>>> The syntax for is() is one gigantic mess. It does work, but 
>>> it's not
>>> pretty. IIRC Walter admitted that it could do with some 
>>> cleanup, but
>>> it's a bit too late now since too much code relies on its 
>>> quirks.
> (...)
>
>>
>> We should clean up this mess in 'is' and 'traits' and 
>> especially for tuples. IMO it's ok if it breaks code as long 
>> as it helps to write cleaner and tough code. This will also 
>> help D to gain more attention.
>> There is so many crap in D... We should really start to clean 
>> up as long as D2 is still a Beta.
>> And we should stop to transform it into something like C++ 
>> with transferring built-in features into the library (like 
>> scope or delete).
>
> D2 is in beta...?
>
> I agree is() and __traits is quite messy, and I have quite some 
> workarounds for various stuff in the combination of is() 
> __traits(), alias, enum and templates - basically generic 
> programming.
>
> But I doubt many people here agree D2 is in beta and will allow 
> breaking existing code in ways that changing the aforementioned 
> features would do.

Not...?
It's far away from final. o.O
If D2 is final I tend to leave this scene... It more broken than 
C++ ever was.