The Thermopylae excerpt of TDPL available online

[Jason House]

Don Wrote:

> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> > Justin Johansson, el 30 de octubre a las 08:42 me escribiste:
> >>> Actually, I think I like that better than 'traits'.
> >>>
> >>> -Lars
> >> I'm in agreement with whoever suggested 'meta' or just about anything else except  'traits'.
> >> 'meta', whilst perhaps an overloaded keyword, is still much more user-friendly.  Whenever
> >> I see 'traits' I get the feeling I need a Ph.D. to understand what it's about.  For some reason,
> >> I don't know why, 'meta' has an aire of karma about it.
> > 
> > "compiler"? That could open the door to other types of access to compiler
> > internals, AST, etc.
> 
> Yup. I think the 'magic namespace' approach is a simple, clean way to 
> incorporate reflection. It could be like Object and TypeInfo, implicitly 
> available in every module and tightly coupled to the compiler, but can 
> be viewed by the user as if it were just a module. It'd be particularly 
> interesting if some of the functions _were_  actually implemented in 
> library code, when possible.

What about going one step further? You could require an import statement to use traits. For example, import traits=std.traits could reproduce your earlier suggestion, but gives added flexibility to the programmer. It also eliminates a keyword.