"with" should be deprecated with extreme prejudice

[Robert Fraser]

Jason House wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> 
>> I think "with" is a very dangerous feature due to the way it hides 
>> symbols. It essentially makes the feeblest attempt at modular reasoning 
>> utterly impossible:
>>
>> int x, y;
>> with (whatever)
>> {
>>      y += x;
>>      ++x;
>> }
>>
>> What can be said about such code? Nothing. If whatever has or will ever 
>> have fields x or y or both, the names will bind to them; otherwise, 
>> they'll bind to the locals. Non-local code dependency at its finest.
>>
>> Maintenance of any type that is being used with "with" becomes a very 
>> dangerous proposition because it can silently change meaning of code.
>>
>> I therefore submit that "with" is an extremely dangerous feature and 
>> should be removed from the language. What say you?
>>
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> How about we keep in D's tradition and outlaw shadowing instead? I use "with" rarely, but appreciate it when I do.

This. Just issue an error/warning if something in the with shadows 
something outside. That way, if the struct/class/template/whatever 
changes, affected code will be notified.