proposal: allow 'with(Foo):' in addition to 'with(Foo){..}'

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 8/10/2014 11:34 AM, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> On Sunday, 10 August 2014 at 17:29:24 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>  1. labels
>>  2. case statements
>>  3. default statements
>>  4. ?: expressions
>>
>> and overloading this with more meanings is, in my not-so-humble-opinion, not a
>> good idea given the very marginal benefit it might have.
>
>   5. Access permissions (public/private/protected).
>   6. File length attributes (@safe: @system: @trusted:)

Again, that is for declarations, not statements.