I'm on the reviewers side here.
To be honest I never liked this DIP and maybe I'll sound dumb but
I think this is a case where this could bring more problem than
anything.
The way I see this would be more like a syntax sugar to create
temporary variable for ref parameters and that's it.
But what I fail to see is why can't the programmer solve this
themselves instead of relying on a new feature that would cause
more harm?
With overload some could do:
void f(int i){
f(i);
}
void f(ref int i){
++i;
writeln(i);
}
void main(){
int i = 0;
f(10);
f(i);
}
prints:
11
1
The "f" function will work with ref or literal (rvalues).
But this will be controlled by the programmer the way they want
it.
Donald.
