On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 11:24:01 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:58:11 bauss via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> [...]
So now "in" is basically just an alias and serves no real
purpose or is there a plan to eventually make "in" mean
something other than just "const"?
There are no plans at this point to change the meaning of in
again. It has been suggested that maybe we could deprecate in
and reintroduce it as meaning const scope later, but nothing
has been decided beyond the fact that in now officially is just
const, because too much code would break when -dip1000 became
the normal behavior if in meant const scope.
Well, that's not entirely true - there's a PR:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8021 and it's not too unlikely
that it will be part of the DIP1000 change or maybe get its own
transition period. Deprecation it and reintroducing doesn't seem
to be super popular.
