Editions Ideas

[Meta]

On Wednesday, 11 March 2026 at 09:27:30 UTC, monkyyy wrote:
> On Wednesday, 11 March 2026 at 04:47:38 UTC, Meta wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 24 December 2025 at 14:06:47 UTC, Timon Gehr 
>> wrote:
>>> On 12/23/25 01:29, 6622 wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I support removing the multiple inheritance, it snuck into 
>>>> the language unintentionally.
>>>
>>> a) It's not actually multiple inheritance.
>>> b) TDPL documents that there can be more than one `alias 
>>> this`.
>>>
>>> This is not any more complicated than allowing more than one 
>>> module to be imported...
>>
>> Is there any reason you can't put free functions in a module 
>> and import them inside a struct to sort of simulate this? You 
>> could even have a weird form of "inheritance" by publicly 
>> importing one module into another.
>
> Youd need something that gives access to the data, if it just 
> knows who's calling it thats just introspection with extra 
> steps; functions need to process data to do something without 
> being a haskell io monad.
>
> I'm not aware of any such pattern that can get access to `this` 
> or context or something

There is __traits(parent) and __traits(child), but I'm not sure 
they would work in this case. But there's also opDispatch, which 
definitely would. At that point though, it's not really worth the 
effort.