Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-11-01 Thread Daniel9 via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:45:56 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: The "reserved" words I'm referring to are not necessarily keywords in the language but otherwise words that should be avoided, especially for defining methods in aggregates. I'm mostly thinking of built-in properties like .init,

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-11-01 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
On Tuesday, November 01, 2016 08:29:17 Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 2016-10-31 23:25, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > IMHO, it's just plain error-prone to allow for any of the built-in > > properties to be overridden, and it should be disallowed in all cases. > > We

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-11-01 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
On 2016-10-31 23:25, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote: IMHO, it's just plain error-prone to allow for any of the built-in properties to be overridden, and it should be disallowed in all cases. We need to be able to rely on stuff like .init of .sizeof being the built-in property, or

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-10-31 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:45:56 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: In the latest release of DMD (2.072.0) TypeInfo.init has been deprecate in favor of TypeInfo.initializer. That would not have been needed if .init wasn't a built-in property but instead a compiler recognized function. at least

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-10-31 Thread Karabuta via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, 31 October 2016 at 20:45:56 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote: The "reserved" words I'm referring to are not necessarily keywords in the language but otherwise words that should be avoided, especially for defining methods in aggregates. I'm mostly thinking of built-in properties like .init,

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-10-31 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
On Monday, October 31, 2016 22:22:00 Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 2016-10-31 21:53, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > > The plan is to deprecate .init as an overridable method or field, and > > then remove support (i.e. .init ALWAYS refers to the compile-generated > > init instance).

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-10-31 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
On 2016-10-31 21:53, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: The plan is to deprecate .init as an overridable method or field, and then remove support (i.e. .init ALWAYS refers to the compile-generated init instance). First step is for Phobos/druntime to eradicate all uses of it. I suspected this was the

Re: Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-10-31 Thread Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
On 10/31/16 4:45 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: In the latest release of DMD (2.072.0) TypeInfo.init has been deprecate in favor of TypeInfo.initializer. That would not have been needed if ..init wasn't a built-in property but instead a compiler recognized function. Thoughts? Too late to change, to

Minimizing "reserved" words

2016-10-31 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
The "reserved" words I'm referring to are not necessarily keywords in the language but otherwise words that should be avoided, especially for defining methods in aggregates. I'm mostly thinking of built-in properties like .init, .classinfo, .sizeof, .outer and so on. All of the above can be