On Tuesday, 3 December 2013 at 19:41:46 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On the other hand Walter has been adamantly against configurable syntax (and talked me into that stance as well), so D is immune from quite a few issues pointed by that rant. D code is readable at least at surface level without needing context.


Arguably, optional () and the mess involved around fall into the category of opaque and unclear syntax.

Reply via email to