Library Typedefs are fundamentally broken

[Tourist via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 21 September 2014 at 20:41:22 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:09:28 -0700
> Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d 
> <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com>
> wrote:
>
>> >> alias Int1 = Typedef!(int, "a.Int1");
>> >> alias Int2 = Typedef!(int, "b.Int2");
>> > ah, now that's cool. module system? wut? screw it, we have
>> > time-proven manual prefixing!
>> Use __MODULE__. -- Andrei
> you still can't grok concept of "ugly == unusable". thank you, 
> i'd
> better fsck this miserably attempt on type security, and many 
> other
> practical programmers too. we trying to explain you this and 
> each time
> you answers "so what? no, it's not." even to people who tried 
> to use
> this disgusting "solution" and found it unacceptable and broken.
>
> alias Int1 = Typedef!(int, __MODULE__~".Int1");
>
> don't make me laugh. this is not just ugly, this is MEGAUGLY. 
> then we
> can make some kind of magic template to hide this uglyness, 
> yes. the
> uglyness which shouldn't be there in the first place. each time 
> when
> such ugly "workaround" proposed we can see the feature as 
> completely
> broken.
>
> people trying to tell you that it is broken for single 
> developer (too
> much to type for nothing). that it is broken for group 
> developement
> (people will forget to mix all the uglyness for necessary 
> result). that
> it is just broken.
>
> please, we aren't bunch of kids who just happen to dislike 
> typing extra
> chars. our objections backed by trying to use the feature in 
> practice.

Why don't you capitalize?
Looks like you're a reasonable person, and this makes an outsider
think that your IQ is lower than the average. IMO.