Storage class consistency

[Paul D. Anderson]

Robert Fraser Wrote:

> Okay, I know everyone wants to put "enum" to rest, but I just want an 
> explanation for why "enum" was chosen in the facre of syntactic 
> difficulties. In particular, what I mean is that for every other storage 
> class the following is possible:
> 
> public
> {
>      int x =  5;
>      float f = 7.0;
> }
> 
> const
> {
>      int x = 5;
>      float y = 7.0;
> }
> 
> ... but not with enum ...
> 
> enum
> {
>      int x = 5;
>      float y = 7.0;
> }
> 
> ... which instead must be used as ...
> 
> enum int x = 5;
> enum float y = 7.0;
> 
> I understand Walter probably thought it through and decided that this 
> inconsistency was worth it to be able to use a confusing keyword, but 
> these are the sort of reasons it's difficult for me to get excited about 
> D2. Is there any particular reason this was thought unimportant?

I agree this is a problem but to me it is a syntax problem rather than a keyword problem. I'd like to see the syntax you described become available. If the problem with the syntax is a conflict with existing "enum" syntax then I think you make a strong case for a new keyword. IIRC, the favorite of the forum was "manifest".

Paul