On Wednesday, 26 May 2021 at 18:58:47 UTC, JN wrote:
Is there any viable usecase for this behavior? I am not buying the "C++ does it and it's legal there" argument. There's a reason most serious C++ projects use static analysis tools anyway. D should be better and protect against dangerous code by default. I think a warning in this case would be warranted.
There are certainly many usecases fo static members, maybe that is why designers feel it should be allowed for instance members too?
I think this is a clear case of something that should produce a warning and provide a silencing annotation fo the cases where you really want it.
