• "Janice Caron" <caron serenityfirefly.com> Sep 06 2007

"Janice Caron" <caron serenityfirefly.com> writes:

-----Original Message-----
From: digitalmars-d-bounces puremagic.com 
[mailto:digitalmars-d-bounces puremagic.com] On Behalf Of Janice Caron
Sent: 06 September 2007 13:37
To: D
Subject: Re: dst = src rather than src dst

 In reality, it's a type definition - the keyword typedef is closer in
 meaning to struct, class or enum (or in C++, namespace) than anything
 else. In fact,

  typedef B A;

 could reasonably be rewritten in D2.0+ as

  struct A
  {
   B b;
   alias b this;
  }



For that matter, if struct inheritance syntax is ever allowed,

 typedef B A;

could be rewritten as

 struct A : B {}


which really makes it really, really clear that "typedef" is not a declaration. 
Come to think of it, "typedef" is short for TYPE DEFinition, so it's very 
/name/ tells you it's a definition, not a declaration. Of course, that struct 
trick won't work for alias.




Also, let's not forget that alias has many other uses beyond replacing C's 
typedef. Those other uses more than justify having a different syntax. There is 
no logic in saying that

 alias long_and_complicated.name.For!(Something) i;

needs to be that way round, purely because of how typedef evolved in C.