On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 06:49:39 -0400, Dmitry Olshansky
<dmitry.o...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 02.06.2012 14:39, Kevin Cox wrote:
On Jun 2, 2012 6:38 AM, "bearophile" <bearophileh...@lycos.com
<mailto:bearophileh...@lycos.com>> wrote:
>
> Jonathan M Davis:
>
>
>> Personally, I wish that it weren't legal to call a static function
with an
>> object and that you had to explicitly use the class,
>
>
> I agree.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile
Same here, D 3.0?
Just rename the function. In contrast it is not easy to code up a
workaround that will "re-enable" static as instance method back if we to
ban it. Generic programming benefits from it in certain scenarios, while
I personally wouldn't mind either way.
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6579
See revised proposal.
-Steve
