On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 10:29:25 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/23/14 6:26 AM, "Marc =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7x0eiI=?=
<[email protected]>" wrote:
Ok, I take it back ;-) Steven is right. It is however the case
that this
function's return value would still be unique.
Yes, it could be unique. I haven't read this thread really, so
I don't know what has been proposed, but looking at the
snippet, wouldn't you have to tag the return value? You tagged
the parameter with unique.
-Steve
Unique is a bad name. You want to have various reference locally,
and the whole discussion is about scope.
Which bring us to the main point here, before discussing
borrowing, we'd better define ownership.
