On Thursday, 16 March 2017 at 19:00:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Actually, https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12625 shows that implicit slicing is still a problem:
Oh yikes, I figured it would still be copied onto the local stack even though it is an rvalue.
But you know, the fact that so many of us are still surprised by just what is going on here tells me it is iffy anyway. Complicated rules can be fine when they bring compelling benefits, but this has a lot of cost and no serious benefit - just slice explicitly when you want to!
Seems this isn't caught by -dip1000, though from what I understand of DIP 1000, this *should* have been rejected.
yea perhaps there is a bug there too.
