typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" defines aliases for more entities than just types. Does all that sound good?

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Max Samukha
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:37:07 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should >eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's >"typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" >defines al

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Sean Kelly
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should > eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's > "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" > defines aliases for more entities than just

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread BLS
On 12/11/2009 16:37, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" defines aliases for more entitie

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
Sean Kelly wrote: Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" defines aliases for more entities

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Ali Cehreli
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should > eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's > "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" > defines aliases for more entities than just

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Justin Johansson
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > Sean Kelly wrote: > > Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > > > >> My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we > >> should eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a > >> generalization of C's "typedef", and the change of name is > >> justified by

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-12 Thread Walter Bright
Justin Johansson wrote: I remember the discussion ... and if two intelligent folks in language design can't agree on "inheritance direction" ... and given the paucity of benefits ... there is only one reasonable promise to fulfill ... D. typedef

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-13 Thread Moritz Warning
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:37:07 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should > eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's > "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "alias" > defines al

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-13 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu
Moritz Warning wrote: On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:37:07 -0600, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: My perception following the discussion around typedef is that we should eliminate it. What we offer is "alias", which is a generalization of C's "typedef", and the change of name is justified by the fact that "

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-13 Thread Moritz Warning
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:07:24 -0800, Walter Bright wrote: > Justin Johansson wrote: >> I remember the discussion ... and if two intelligent folks in language >> design can't agree on "inheritance direction" ... and given the paucity >> of benefits ... there is only one reasonable promise to fulfill

Re: typedef redux

2009-11-19 Thread Justin Johansson
Walter Bright wrote: Justin Johansson wrote: I remember the discussion ... and if two intelligent folks in language design can't agree on "inheritance direction" ... and given the paucity of benefits ... there is only one reasonable promise to fulfill ... D. t