Re: rvalue references

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 3 June 2015 at 03:20:48 UTC, bitwise wrote:
Anyways, moving forward with the assumption that the meaning of 
'in' will
not change, I still don't understand. Why couldn't 'in ref' be 
allowed to
accept rvalues in addition to 'auto ref'?

For the same reasons that we can't have const ref accept rvalues, 
especially since in ref basically _is_ const ref in most cases 
right now.

- Jonathan M Davis