UFCS and constructors

[deadalnix]

On Tuesday, 2 July 2013 at 12:57:50 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 07/02/2013 09:35 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> One of the "big" problems with allowing UFCS and constructors 
>> is that a
>> "." which meant "scope" can now mean "function call".
>> ...
>
> I missed this point.
>
> 'One of the drawbacks of UFCS is that "bar.foo" which meant 
> "scope lookup" or "opDispatch instantiation" or "alias this 
> lookup" can now also mean "UFCS lookup".'
>
> Fixed.

That is an issue, we have all of this, and prioritization 
mechanism is implementation defined right now.