On 12/14/10, retard <[email protected]> wrote: > My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and > flexible mechanism for operators would fit D. I'm also a bit more of a > fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I > haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere > was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more.
You can always open up a new topic and discuss possible new features and/or changes for D.
