Name That Technique!

[Dominikus Dittes Scherkl via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 3 February 2017 at 23:33:58 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 2/3/2017 11:14 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 2/3/17 10:41 AM, Daniel N wrote:
>>> On Friday, 3 February 2017 at 14:43:01 UTC, Dominikus Dittes 
>>> Scherkl wrote:
>>>> DIP 1005 provides new syntax to make it possible to avoid 
>>>> global imports.
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>
>>> I like it!
>> Wow. This is... brilliant. Thanks for the great idea. I ran a 
>> few tests and it
>> seems to be doing out of the box most of what we want with 
>> DIP1005 with no
>> language change at all.
>>
>> Congratulations!
>
> I agree, it's pretty dazz! We need to give this technique a 
> memorable name (not an acronym). I thought "Voldemort Types" 
> turned out rather well, whereas CTFE is klunky, UFCS is even 
> worse. The absolute worst is C++ SFINAE.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>   Scherkl-Nielsen Lookup?
>
> The perfect bikeshedding moment!
>
> Daniel, Dominikus: please consider writing an article about 
> this.
Thank you all that you like the idea.
I found myself using this idiom quite some time now in my 
libraries but only recently realized, that it is the reason why I 
didn't found DIP1005 too compelling - I just didn't need it 
because of my workaround.
So I thought I should share the idea - and Daniels extension 
makes it much easier to use. Have to update my libs with that :-)

But is this really worth an article?