On 1/11/2016 8:02 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Surely the fact that people are implementing machinery to undo the
damage done is a strong indication that they don't want the feature.
Please, can anyone produce an argument in favour...? Otherwise just
accept that it was a bad idea and eject it into space.
Why could anyone be attached to it?
I already did for your scheme:
int a;
extern (C++,ns) { int a; } // error!
The whole point of namespaces in C++ is to introduce scoped names. Not putting
them in a scope might work for your project, but in general it will not, and the
workarounds you suggested for it (putting them in separate modules) are awkward.
All (*) the specific examples you've posted about fundamental problems with the
current scheme have been adequately addressed (bugs were fixed, and
misunderstandings clarified). Nobody in this thread has been able to determine,
with an example, what all the other problems you talk about are.
(*) except the delegate one, and there are a couple solutions on the table for
that.
I want to deal with the problems you're having, and find a solution. But without
examples illustrating them, I am dead in the water and cannot help.
