Pow Expressions - not worth the juice?

[Lance Bachmeier]

On Monday, 2 February 2026 at 20:23:01 UTC, Sam Potter wrote:
> On Monday, 2 February 2026 at 17:43:45 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> https://dlang.org/spec/expression.html#pow_expressions
>>
>> They're a bit of an oddball feature in D, in that it's the 
>> only feature that relies on Phobos for its implementation.
>>
>> Time for it to go?
>
> Please no.
>
> Operator overloading for ^^ is a really nice quality of life 
> improvement for numerical and scientific programming.
>
> All five major numerical programming languages support this: 
> MATLAB, Python, Fortran, Julia, and R.

We should have more operators, not fewer.