On Wednesday, 20 January 2016 at 02:15:27 UTC, Manu wrote:
The C++ namespace semantic doesn't have a proper analogy in D,
and the
D code is already organised into modules anyway making
mirroring of
the C++ semantic irrelevant.
We don't mirror C/C++ semantics in other facets of the
bindings, we
just make it link. There's no reason to deviate from that
pattern
here.
Nobody seems to want to address the problem points I raise in
my last
email though. If it was benign, I wouldn't care, but it causes
way
more harm than good.
What happens when one has conflicting symbols in 2 C++ namespaces
?
D's mapping of C++ namespaces could just mimic how import
resolution work : allow qualified and unqualified access to the
symbol when there is no conflict, forces you to use the qualified
one when there (or to create an alias, or whatever).
