On 09/16/13 22:38, Namespace wrote: >> [1] Obviously, not a practical short term option for the existing D2 >> language. >> That's probably clear from the context, and the question was meant to be >> rhetorical -- but it could actually be done and would make sense; it's >> just >> not a change that would make enough of a difference on its own; the cost >> would be to high. > > Why to high? Too much compiler magic or dmd internal dependences?
Too much (language) change for too little gain; there are many, many much more important things that need to be fixed. Being able to have several user-defined kinds of arrays is a nice-to-have feature, but not one that determines whether the language is usable or not. artur