Unified handling of basic and user-defined type proposal

[Eldar Insafutdinov]

On Tuesday, 27 November 2012 at 17:49:00 UTC, Rob T wrote:
>
> Unfortunately D was modeled after C++, a legacy language built 
> on top of an inconsistent foundation. Even though D is an 
> improvement, I think D has inherited at its foundation a 
> crippling affect that will be impossible to shake off fully. 
> The language would have to fundamentally change to become 
> consistent.

Yes, this is what I implied in my post, that the decision of 
handling basic types separately from user defined comes from C++ 
which itself is built on the ancient C. Symbol itself is a vague 
and legacy concept that comes from C/C++ and we must not include 
it in the justification for how language features should work.

> No matter, as you've suggested (and I think shown), D can still 
> be adjusted to get rid of at least some of the crippling 
> effects of inconsistency, and even a small fix to an 
> inconsistency can potentially create a big improvement.

I also believe that it is possible to introduce these changes in 
an iterative manner. Each step will provide significant 
improvements to the language. If everybody agrees that this 
proposed change is worth exploring into and has chances to be 
included in D, I am willing to commit my time to implement it.