On 27.04.2011 19:13, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > clear is not a keyword, it is possible to name a member clear, and also have > a clear global function.
Sure it is, though it is counter-intuitive - to use same name with quite different meaning. As for me, if this will really be in final spec, I'll always alias it to destroy(). BTW, could you please point me to "the ultimate authority"? I am referring to your "The name choice is no longer up for debate. It's already set in print, and in the language." - so far, I was thinking that DigitalMars website is the one, but your words make me wonder, if this is still true. And, since there is a phrase: "It is not governed by a corporate agenda or any overarching theory of programming. The needs and contributions of the D programming community form the direction it goes." I would like to know, how "the community" come to this choice, which is quite confusing, at least. /Alexander
