Walter Bright <[email protected]> wrote:
Right now, mixins are defined and used as:
template foo(T) { declarations... }
mixin foo!(int) handle;
The proposal is to switch it around:
mixin template foo(T) { declarations... }
foo!(int) handle;
to follow the notion that mixin templates are very different from
regular templates, and that should be reflected in their definition
rather than use.
What do you think?
I wholeheartedly support this.
As for the criticisms given by many here, one usage I have often
encountered is the 'pseudo-type' - a mixin'ed template that offers
behavior close to that of embedding a struct, but with better access
to its context.
--
Simen
