On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 23:07:22 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2018 at 13:55, 12345swordy via
Digitalmars-d-announce <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 15:08:33 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have finished writing the last details of the copy
> constructor DIP[1] and also I have published the first
> implementation [2]. As I wrongfully made a PR for the DIP
> queue in the early stages of the development of the DIP, I
> want to announce this way that the DIP is ready for the
> draft review now. Those who are familiar with the compiler,
> please take a look at the implementation and help me improve
> it!
>
> Thanks,
> RazvanN
>
> [1] https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/129
> [2] https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8688
The only thing I object is adding yet another attribute to a
already big bag of attributes. What's wrong with adding
keywords?
-Alexander
I initially felt strongly against @implicit, it shouldn't be
necessary, and we could migrate without it.
But... assuming that @implicit should make an appearance anyway
(it
should! being able to mark implicit constructors will fill a
massive
usability hole in D!), then it doesn't hurt to use it eagerly
here and
avoid a breaking change at this time, since it will be the
correct
expression for the future regardless.
If that where the case, then why not make it an actual keyword? A
frequent complaint regarding D is that there are too many
attributes, this will undoubtedly adding more to it.
-Alexander
