On Saturday, 26 April 2014 at 23:05:23 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 04/27/2014 12:43 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Saturday, 26 April 2014 at 21:57:55 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 04/26/2014 09:27 PM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
We already have a feature to manage conflicts and
organisation in D
code - modules!
Named mixin templates are a much closer fit.
Using named mixin templates for pure scope resolution is side
effect and
should be discouraged in any reasonable code.
I don't really advocate using named mixin templates directly as
much as just the same lookup rules.
Well that wasn't clear from your comments at all, quite the
contrary ;)
There are specific D tools
designed for that from the very beginning
Named mixin templates are also 'designed for scope resolution
from the very beginning' if that means anything.
and we should use and/or fix those.
They don't fit. You simply cannot have multiple D modules per
file.
I don't see any problem with having lot of files. It is natural
way organizing D code if you consider protection attributes that
define module as minimal encapsulation unit.
