On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 19:20:09 UTC, anonymous wrote:
On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 18:47:00 UTC, Namespace wrote:
const(Matrix)* m = &t.getCurrentModelViewMatrix(); //
currently
}
----
But IMO it would be a lot nicer if I could store the reference
like this:
----
ref const(Matrix) m = t.getCurrentModelViewMatrix(); // nicer
----
[Of course the name is exaggerated for the purpose of
demonstration.]
May this be worth of an enhancement request?
Maybe, but I think you'd have to present a better argument.
It's not obvious to me how `ref T x = y;` is supposed to be a
lot nicer than `T* x = &y;`.
It is, for example, not nullable. ;)
Or was this already rejected?
I don't know. But since it's a C++ thing, it's probably been
discussed.
I will research this. Thank you.
