Proposal keyword 'outer'

[Tom S]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> Seems an ok proposal for outer classes.
> But as for mixins that doesn't make sense, the scope they access is 
> already the scope of the instantiation.

That's the point. The rules for mixins must change as they are 
inconsistent and error prone at the moment. IMO they should only be 
granted access to the outer scope thru the 'outer' keyword and by 
default only see the scope of their declaration.


-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak  /+ a.k.a. h3r3tic +/