Fully dynamic d by opDotExp overloading

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.1171.1239998473.22690.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 03:54:47PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> What
>> opDotExp is, is a tool of only occasional use that provides only a small
>> benefit, *and* ends up destroying a much more important tool: 
>> compile-time
>> checking on a class's members.
>
> Wouldn't the compile time checking remain the same on any class except
> the Variant (or whatever) which implements the new operator?
>
> If it is constrained to one type, the destruction seems like it would be
> acceptable. You can't trust much on a Variant at compile time anyway.
>

The problem is there would be no way to tell at a glance whether a given 
class uses opDotExp or not. You'd have to go look it up for every class. So, 
ok, we could solve that by requiring a different syntax for dynamic 
invokation. But we already have that: just pass a string to a dispatch 
function.