Additional Binary Operators

[Era Scarecrow]

On Tuesday, 5 March 2013 at 12:40:32 UTC, Artur Skawina wrote:
> One problem with string-based DSLs is scoping - they only work 
> properly when mixed in into the current scope.
>
>    auto c = mixin(myDSL!"a?:+:b");
>    mixin myDSL!("c", "a?:+:b");
>    mixin (myDSL!("c", "a?:+:b"));
>    // etc
>
> is sometimes enough, but often the code would be clearer w/o 
> the mixin.

  Perhaps the mixin (@mixin?) could be moved to a function's 
signature as an attribute? Then the compiler knows it's going to 
be mixed in and removes the need to do it yourself; Mind you it 
would have to return a string to be valid; Or it would be part of 
the base signature instead.

   string myDSL(string) @mixin;
   mixin string myDSL(string);

   //now without the mixin..
   auto c = myDSL!("a?:+:b");

  This seems like it would be an easy thing to add and shouldn't 
complicate the language any.