"with" should be deprecated with extreme prejudice

[Nick Sabalausky]

"BCS" <none at anon.com> wrote in message 
news:a6268ff5f5d8cba54f824da454 at news.digitalmars.com...
> Hello Nick,
>
>> I'm not a touch-typer, but I've never seen much of a point to "with".
>> If I have to access a bunch of members of
>> "foo.member.x.bar[17].fizzle", I'll just do "auto fizz = 
>> foo.member.x.bar[17].fizzle;" and use that, or put it into
>
> that dosn't work if it's by value and is used as an Lvalue.
>
>> a function that takes a "typeof(fizze)", or do something else along
>
> like this? that looks... odd.
>
> void outer()
> {
>     void inner(ref T t)
>     {
>          t.somthing;
>          ...
>     }
>     inner(foo.member.x.bar[17].fizzle);
> }
>
>> those lines. I've yet to come across a case where something like
>> that isn't perfectly sufficient.
>>

Like I said, "or something along those lines". It all depends on the 
specific code. I just haven't ever had any specific case where I felt like I 
needed "with".