On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:23:46 -0400, Jeremie Pelletier <jerem...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:51:28 -0400, Jarrett Billingsley
<jarrett.billings...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Steven Schveighoffer
<schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
in means that it's a reference that cannot be changed. In D1, it
means you
cannot change the value, but if the value contains a reference to
something
else (like an array), you can change what it points to.
in: Use this for pass by reference for a value that you won't change
No, sorry, this is wrong. In D1, 'in' is the default (pass by value)
and does nothing.
Oh, that's... um useless... Pardon me for thinking it meant something
;)
I'm pretty sure it means something in D2 though.
-Steve
'in' means 'const scope' in D2, which is using pass-by-value semantics.
Yes, you are right. I can't see the benefit to it, so I guess my
recommendation is not to ever use in (use const instead).
I myself stay out of 'ref' and 'out' params since they do not yet
optimize and add quite a lot of overhead making temporary "safe" copies
of the data.
I understand the problem behind not optimizing (inline), but I'm not sure
what you mean by making temporary "safe" copies.
Also 'scope' params have a meaning, when a delegate parameter is
declared as scope, it allows a closure to use stack storage instead of
the usual heap storage.
yes, but in the context of an 'in' parameter, most of the time you are not
passing a delegate using in, so scope doesn't mean much there.
-Steve
