Lutger wrote: > I do think this proposal is better than what we have since it meets the > major requirements, but have one minor point of critique: > > Offering a mixin is not a good enough argument to address the DRY > shortcoming. While it may be acceptable in many cases, it is ugly and messes > with reporting of errors, debugging, code coverage and profiling.
Very true. We really need to come up with a way to fix this. That said, I sometimes think that string mixins will NEVER get fixed unless Walter has a strong impetus to do so: i.e., people are using them and hurting. But that's another DIP for another day. :P
