On Saturday, 26 April 2014 at 15:19:55 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 04/26/2014 01:57 PM, Dicebot wrote:
I think this is a very bad proposal. Necessity to define
namespaces for
interfacing with C++ must not result in usage of namespaces of
pure D code.
Well, the proposed feature does not add any new capabilities
except proper mangling. In pure D code
namespace foo{
// declarations
}
would be basically the same as
private mixin template Foo(){
// declarations
}
mixin Foo foo;
which is available today. I guess namespaces will occur in pure
D code as sparsely as the above construction, because they are
not particularly useful.
This is side effect of an advanced D feature that is unlikely to
be used by newbies and is less tempting to use in practice
because it involves some boilerplate. Providing it as simple
stand-alone feature is akin to saying "hey, use me!".
I don't want that in D.
I would have also strongly objected to usage of template mixins
for namespace during any code review.
