On Tuesday, 8 October 2024 at 18:24:50 UTC, germandiago wrote:
On Saturday, 5 October 2024 at 06:35:57 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
Why is this allowed
```D
struct EntityDef
{
struct
{
int hp;
}
}
```
But not this fucking thing?
```D
struct EntityDef
{
struct
{
int hp;
} stats;
}
```
Let me name my shit
No, i don't want to do:
```D
struct EntityDef
{
struct Stats
{
int hp;
} Stats stats;
}
```
Repeating the same name 3 times, i should go back to the stone
age too no?
C and all other C like languages allow me to be concise
Why is it a D thing to be backward?
The problem is clear. What I do not agree with is your tone. I
am noone here, but I think it is not good to tolerate this
level. It sets a bad precedent.
Just my 2 cents.
I'm not a big fan of using declarations as type either:
```d
bool doWeWantThat( struct{ int notsure;} p)
{
return false;
}
```
in the same way, named fields in tuples is an aberration to me,
because "why not use a struct instead ?"
