At the risk of being too persistent, curious as to the reason for disdain for named field initialization syntax and talk of its deprecation.

- does it cause problems?
- is it on the chopping block?
- is this the best way to find out the status of a specific issue like this?

This was originally asked in the learn forum. I see benefits to the syntax - but I may be off base:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/oetijisdqjgcuvfvojiy@forum.dlang.org

An additional similar question:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/zknqlojefvccnbpmnvae@forum.dlang.org

Any insights as to where this feature is going are appreciated.

Thanks,
Dan

I like this syntax too. I think/hope that for static stuff it will be here to stay.

On Tuesday, 4 December 2012 at 16:25:12 UTC, Dan wrote:
> At the risk of being too persistent, curious as to the reason for disdain for named field initialization syntax and talk of its deprecation.
>
> - does it cause problems?
> - is it on the chopping block?
> - is this the best way to find out the status of a specific issue like this?
>
> This was originally asked in the learn forum. I see benefits to the syntax - but I may be off base:
> http://forum.dlang.org/post/oetijisdqjgcuvfvojiy@forum.dlang.org
>
> An additional similar question:
> http://forum.dlang.org/post/zknqlojefvccnbpmnvae@forum.dlang.org
>
> Any insights as to where this feature is going are appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan