mixin not overloading other mixins, Bug or feature?

[Travis Boucher]

BCS wrote:
> By don't overload, I'm taking about "defined to not overload".
> 
> That removes "bug" leaving "misfeature", and "feature".
> 
> I think the rational is that allowing them to overload makes the order 
> of expansion hard to impossible to work out.
> For example:
> 
> template Bar(T) { const bool v = true; }
> template Foo(T)
> {
>   static if(Bar!(T).v)
>       template Bar(U : T) { const bool v = false; }
>   else
>       template Bar(U : T) { const bool v = true; }
> }
> 
> mixin Foo!(int);
> 
> static assert(Bar!(char)); // works
> static assert(Bar!(int));  // what about this?
> 
> By making mixins not overload, many (if not all) such cases become illegal.
> 
> 


I'm not fully sure this applies to my issue, maybe it is because I am 
not fully sure how templates are implemented (in my mind, I think 
something similar to macro expansion).

My issue is with function overloads.  2 functions, same name, different 
parameters.  Right now my only solution is hacky string mixins.

It seems to me that 2 templates should be able to mix into the same 
struct, overloading the same functions, if:

1. They don't contain the same parameters with eachother.  If they do, 
then conflict.

2. They don't contain the same parameters of the struct they are mixing 
into.  If they do, then use the one in the struct (like it works now).