Here's one more vote for extending UFCS to operator overloading.
Elie wrote that it's "a restriction that seems pointless and
arbitrary"... which summarizes my own thoughts rather well, too.
There are certainly concerning scenarios that can arise from
making this change, but the correct way to approach this problem
is not to tell the programmer "I won't let you use that tool,
because if you mishandle it then you might find yourself in a
nasty mess." That's what Java does - it treats the programmer
like an idiot - and that's why it's so universally despised.
It has consistently been my impression that this is very much not
the sort of philosophy D follows.
Anyway, D already provides the programmer with a wealth of tools
which, if mishandled, can place them in a nasty mess. So I think
this is a poor rationale for withholding from the programmer one
more.
