On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 04:26:01 UTC, Alex Rønne
Petersen wrote:
It's an awful lot of magic (it's not as easy in the
implementation as it sounds like) for questionable gain when we
have the with statement IMO.
"it's not as easy in the implementation as it sounds like"
----------------------------------------------------------
If this argument means: "It's going to increase the compilation
time too much", then it's obviously a good reason not to do it.
But if it means: "It's a lot of work to modify the compiler
source code", then that's completely an unacceptable argument.
The question of how much work it is to implement, has nothing to
do with whether it's a good feature to have or not. And that's
what we're discussing.
"questionable gain"
-------------------
Well, if you never use enum flags to control the specifics of
your types and functions, then the gain is zero. That is parallel
to: if you never create any variables, then the gain of the
keyword 'auto' is zero. If you do however do these things
constantly, then the gain is: less typing and cleaner syntax.
Comparison:
enum Size { small, medium, big }
enum Fitness { thin, strong, weak, fat }
enum Goal { love, build, heal, kill }
class Character(Size s, Fitness f, Motivation m)
{
...
}
auto c1 = new Character!(Size.big, Fitness.fat, Goal.kill);
auto c2 = new Character!(big, fat, kill);
