"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.375.1331338580.4860.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > > Which is one of the reasons that I really don't like the idea. Sometimes > it's > nice with strings, but it creates inconsistencies, and stuff like 5.max(7) > just > seems insane. UFCS will give people more freedom and may help templates in > some cases, but I think that it's a major step back for readibility in > general. >
This is why C# requires that you declare a function to be UFCS in order to actualy use it with UFCS syntax (although they don't call it UFCS). I used to be pretty strongly in favor of that, but I've since gotten used to D's lax-ness about it.