On 12/04/2011 03:53 AM, Don wrote:
On 04.12.2011 03:40, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 12/04/2011 03:10 AM, Don wrote:
On 04.12.2011 00:13, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 12/04/2011 12:09 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
Famous last words:
On 12/3/11 11:47 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
There is nothing wrong with is(XXX), […]
David
An explanation would be more helpful.
For many years is(xxx) been reviled as the ugliest thing in the
language. The simple forms are OK, but features kept getting piled onto
it until it became clearly unworkable.
So why not keep the simple forms and just replace the more obscure
functionality that is better expressed by other means?
Yeah, that's the idea.
Removing is expressions entirely would break most D code (at least it
would break all of mine).
Yes. Nobody's ever proposed complete removal of is expressions.
It's the things like:
is (foo bar == super)
which I think you can't understand without looking up the spec every
time. We still don't have a nice way of expressing such things.
Ok, thanks. I fully agree that those should be replaced.
