proposal: heredoc comments to allow `+/` in comments, eg from urls or documented unittests

[Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa)]

On 02/09/2018 07:11 AM, Kagamin wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 11:16:01 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) 
> wrote:
>> On 02/09/2018 05:31 AM, Kagamin wrote:
>>> version(none)q{ FOO }; is likely to work for most stuff too.
>>
>> /+ +/ is likely to work for most stuff, too.
> 
> So do /* */

Seriously, are you trying to troll? (Not rhetorical, genuinely wondering.)

No. No, /* */ isn't likely to work with most stuff. Not in any codebase 
that actually USES /* */. Not without it being granted nestability. And 
no, I'm not talking theoretically or speculating here, this is speaking 
from years of direct experience on codebases that use /* */.