Feature request - simpler constructors

[Regan Heath]

Alternate syntax suggestion:

class Point {
   int x;
   int y;
   int foo;  //not implicitly assigned any value

   this(int x, int y, int bar):(x,y)  //bar is not assigned to anything
   {
     //super constructor calls go here
     //members are assigned here (_after_ calling super)
     //first line of user code goes here
     if (x > 5) {}  //refers to member 'x' not parameter 'x'
   }
}

The idea(s) here being:

1. If you want to implicitly assign parameters to members you must give 
the parameters 'exactly' the same name as the member.  (I find myself 
wanting to do this anyway)

2. If you use the member/parameter name inside the constructor you will 
be referring to the member, and not the paramter.  (Essentially the 
parameter ceases to exist the moment it has been assigned to the member)

3. The variables to be assigned are specified by name (only) in the :() 
part of the constructor.  (The compiler will verify these 
members/parameters exist - requires verifying members in base classes too)

4. Assignments happen after calls to super* but before the first line of 
constructor code.  This ensures they 'overwrite' any values assigned in 
super calls.  In the case of an explicit super call assignments happen 
before the first line of constructor code, before the explicit super call.

This syntax gives a bit more flexibility that the original idea at the 
cost of some verbosity but I think it's still fairly clean and clear.

Regan