This doesn't work:

template A() {
	void B() {};
}
template B() {
	mixin A!();
}
void main() {
	B!()();
}

Is this intentional?

On 8/4/18 4:10 PM, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
> This doesn't work:
> 
> template A() {
>      void B() {};
> }
> template B() {
>      mixin A!();
> }
> void main() {
>      B!()();
> }
> 
> Is this intentional?

I believe mixin templates introduce a new symbol namespace to a degree. I doubt you would be able to do something like this.

-Steve

On Saturday, August 04, 2018 17:10:32 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars- d-learn wrote:
> On 8/4/18 4:10 PM, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
> > This doesn't work:
> >
> > template A() {
> >
> >      void B() {};
> >
> > }
> > template B() {
> >
> >      mixin A!();
> >
> > }
> > void main() {
> >
> >      B!()();
> >
> > }
> >
> > Is this intentional?
>
> I believe mixin templates introduce a new symbol namespace to a degree. I doubt you would be able to do something like this.

A prime example of this is how you can't introduce function overloads with a template mixin.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Saturday, 4 August 2018 at 21:10:32 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 8/4/18 4:10 PM, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
>> This doesn't work:
>> 
>> template A() {
>>      void B() {};
>> }
>> template B() {
>>      mixin A!();
>> }
>> void main() {
>>      B!()();
>> }
>> 
>> Is this intentional?
>
> I believe mixin templates introduce a new symbol namespace to a degree. I doubt you would be able to do something like this.
>
> -Steve

What is the rational behind this?