On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:38:36 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
True. I agree that redefining plain "x" to mean "initial value of x"would be difficult to implement for ref arguments
I think it would be wrong to boot. "ref" is an indirect type, like a pointer. Changes made to "it" (eg the reference'd value) *need* to be seen in the out contract. I don't think it makes sense to talk about "the old value of the reference". That'd be like asking for the old value of what a pointer was pointing to.
