UFCS for struct opCall?

[Timon Gehr]

On 04/09/2013 01:48 AM, bearophile wrote:
> On request by Maxim Fomin I ask an opinion here. This is a very small
> enhancement request, that for me is borderline bug report (so originally
> I didn't plan in showing it in the main D newsgroup):
>
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9857
> ...

This is getting old. We should discuss the general issue, issue 9857 is 
just another instance of it.

Namely:

If the language defines a rewrite from A to B and from B to C, is a 
rewrite from A to C implied?

I'd say yes, because this is the obvious behaviour. If it is not there, 
we have to add a magical "has already been rewritten" flag, countering 
intuition. Furthermore, as far as I am concerned, this is easier to 
implement. DMD's inconsistent behaviour has been discussed on d.D.learn 
multiple times.

Furthermore, the only argument brought up against this so far is that 
some language constructs are special and ergo they must be mutually 
incompatible. This is a complete non sequitur.

>
> Jonathan Davis doesn't like this. For more information I suggest to take
> a look at the thread in Bugzilla.
> ...

There is not more information there, it's just given in a blown up 
representation. He does not justify his opinion.