On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 23:42:20 +0400, BCS <a...@pathlink.com> wrote: > Reply to Nick, > >> "Andrei Alexandrescu" <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote in message >> news:gsku34$29t...@digitalmars.com... >> >>> bearophile wrote: >>> >>>> BCS: >>>> >>>>> you spotted the issue, code porting and principle of least >>>>> surprise< >>>>> >>>> - Code porting: If you port C code to D, it uses /* */ in a non >>>> nested way >>>> >>> No. This is valid C: >>> /* comment /* more comment */ >>> >> That seems like a rather trivial thing to be designing our language >> around. And regarding principle of least surprise, the current /**/ >> behavior is only least-surprise for people who are already familiar >> with that particular detail of /**/. From a fresher perspective, the >> /++/ behavior is vastly less surprising. >> I can understand the desire not to cause too much trouble for porting, >> but sometimes I think D places far too much emphasis on that. >> > > I'd be fine depricating /**/. > >
You mean, deprecating /++/? Personally, I rarely use /++/ because it feels uncommon and unstandard. I will be glad if /**/ become nestable and /++/ go away.
