On Tue, 05 May 2015 17:33:09 -0400, Namespace <rswhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
I've discussed that so many times... just search for auto / scope ref...
;)
It will never happen.
See:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ntsyfhesnywfxvzbe...@forum.dlang.org?page=1
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ylebrhjnrrcajnvtt...@forum.dlang.org?page=1
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/mailman.2989.1356370854.5162.digitalmar...@puremagic.com
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/tkzyjhshbqjqxwzpp...@forum.dlang.org#post-mailman.2965.1356319786.5162.digitalmars-d-learn:40puremagic.com
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/hga1jl$18hp$1...@digitalmars.com
I did read some of these.
Has anyone brought up simply allowing "in ref" or "const scope ref" to
accept rvalues? If DIPs 69 and 25 were implemented, I don't see why this
would be a problem. I agree that "const ref" should not, but I don't see a
problem with "const scope ref".
I haven't seen a conversation that was strongly in favor of DIP 36. Why
hasn't it been rejected?
Bit
