"with" still sucks + removing features + adding features

[Jason House]

Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:

> Bill Baxter wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Jason House
> > <jason.james.house at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> It's all a matter of perspective. I see both as begin .. end. That may be the same reason why I think addition when I see foo(bar()) + baz(37). The extra cruft is more or less ignored when figuring out the basics of what is going on.
> > 
> > Agreed.  If you tell someone   a .. b  means a non-inclusive range
> > from a to b, then ask them to guess what    blarf a .. blarf b  means,
> > I would be very surprised if many guessed "inclusive range from blarf
> > a  to blarf b".
> 
> But it's not "blarf". It's "case". I am floored that nobody sees the 
> elegance of that syntax.
> 
> Andrei

I don't know if it's a consolation or throwing salt in your eyes, but I still don't see the elegance of using the keyword for an enumerated set to represent manifest constants.