• Namespace (4/4) May 31 2013 I thougth that in dmd 2.063 alias this : foo; would be allowed.
• =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= (9/13) May 31 2013 You mean the equal sign?
• Namespace (2/2) May 31 2013 No, I meant the colon.
• Simen Kjaeraas (5/9) May 31 2013 Probably not enough time. I've not read anything about it no

"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:

I thougth that in dmd 2.063 alias this : foo; would be allowed.
That was what the preview of dmd 2.063 said:
http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_062
Why wasn't it implemented?

=?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:

On 05/31/2013 05:12 AM, Namespace wrote:

 I thougth that in dmd 2.063 alias this : foo; would be allowed.

You mean the equal sign?

     alias this = foo;

That was implemented in 2.061 by accident likely due to a confusion 
whether the new alias syntax should apply to 'alias this' as well.

 That was what the preview of dmd 2.063 said:
 http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_062
 Why wasn't it implemented?

You will notice that it is about removing the "alias foo = int" syntax 
in 2.062 (not related to 2.063). (That page contains the changes about 
more than one version.)

Ali

"Namespace" <rswhite4 googlemail.com> writes:

No, I meant the colon.
alias this : foo;

"Simen Kjaeraas" <simen.kjaras gmail.com> writes:

On 2013-05-31, 14:12, Namespace wrote:

 I thougth that in dmd 2.063 alias this : foo; would be allowed.
 That was what the preview of dmd 2.063 said:
 http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_062
 Why wasn't it implemented?

Probably not enough time. I've not read anything about it no
longer being planned.

-- 
Simen