"Andrei Alexandrescu" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On 3/17/11 11:21 AM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: >> On 3/17/11, Nick Sabalausky<[email protected]> wrote: >>> I've long been convinced that "alias old new;" should really be "alias >>> new = >>> old;" The current way confuses me, and I *still* have to consciously >>> stop >>> and think about it every time I write an alias statement (including just >>> now). >>> >> >> I thought I was the only one. The `alias symbol this` in structs in >> particular always stops me and I have to think about what it means, >> even though it might be obvious. > > I'm with y'all too. Even Walter needs to stop and think for a second. > We're considering enabling > > alias a = b; > > as an equivalent for > > alias b a; >
As a minor side-benefit, that would mean that the "alias this" feature *really would* involve the actual code "alias this" ;)
