On Tuesday, 5 May 2015 at 21:58:57 UTC, bitwise wrote:
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
We proposed that in DIP 36:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ylebrhjnrrcajnvtt...@forum.dlang.org?page=1
Some more interesting discussion parts:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/4f84d6dd.5090...@digitalmars.com
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/km3k8v$80p$1...@digitalmars.com?page=1
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/cafdvkcvf6g8mc01tds6ydxqczbfp1q-a-oefvk6bgetwciu...@mail.gmail.com
As you can see there are debate for ages. Many people of the
community really wants a solution, but since Andrei and Walter
believe that it brings no real benefit, nothing has changed. I
stuck with auto ref + templates if I need lvalues + rvalues
(which is often the case in game dev).