Trass3r <[email protected]> wrote:
In the past template mixins were a neat special usecase of templates.
Now with the "mixin template()" syntax they've become a separate thing
because you can add special code for handling them, e.g. allowing them
to add constructors to classes.
The question is: what is their right to exist? Is there anything you can
do with them you can't with string mixins (or vice versa)?
String mixins are, strictly speaking, more powerful than template mixins.
However, the syntax is unwieldy in comparison.
--
Simen
