An inconvenient truth

[Dave]

>
> Anyhow, this segment of the discussion is somewhat orthogonal to the rest 
> of it as I think we all agree a Unicode notation will be an alternative, 
> not an exclusive choice for template instantiations.
>

Alternative? That's really what we need; a different group of symbols that 
denote exactly the same thing, in Unicode no less <g>

This whole discussion is getting goofy.

Imagine a code maintainer who has a hard enough time grasping what the 
template code is doing, much less having to slog through code where the 
original developer(s) decided to use the Unicode "alternative" depending on 
what day of the week it was.

Beautiful!

Let's all step back for a second here, and then just grant that Walter's 
original idea is good enough and move on to more important issues.

It took me all of, oh, 5 seconds to look at some D template examples to 
figure out what was going on and start emulating it with a "Hello D Template 
World" of my own for a little practice. So I think the notion that new users 
are going to eschew D or D templates based on the !() syntax is just plain 
wrong, especially since somehow the discussion has now changed to a Unicode 
Alternative (which, BTW, would only make it harder on new users).

Even the original notion of deprecating the !() syntax in favor of something 
else is, to me at least, ludicrous. That said if it still needs to be done, 
we definately need to stick to ASCII.

Geesh!

- Dave