On 12/11/10 2:49 CST, spir wrote:
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 18:28:08 -0800
Andrei Alexandrescu<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
It's sort of ironic. Tu viens d'implementing yet another type
constructor yourself!
The need for yet another one signifie sûrement (probably means) their semantics
(in the human sense) are wrongly defined. D2 needs un regard neuf et lucide (a
fresh external look) at its whole set of qualifiers.
I'm all for it. Even if we can't change the language, I'd like to know
"the truth". Because if there's a simple way to go about it that has
comparable power, we couldn't find it.
Andrei
