On 13 November 2014 19:56, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday, 13 November 2014 at 09:29:22 UTC, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: >> >> Are you guys saying you don't feel this proposal is practical? >> http://wiki.dlang.org/User:Schuetzm/scope >> >> I think it's a very interesting approach, and comes from a practical >> point of view. It solves the long-standings issues, like scope return >> values, in a very creative way. >> > > You need to define ownership before defining borrowing.
I don't think this proposal has issues with that. The thing at the root of the call tree is the 'owner'. Nothing can escape a scope call-tree, so the owner or allocation policy doesn't matter, and that's the whole point.
