On Tuesday, 23 June 2015 at 18:11:21 UTC, bitwise wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:09:45 -0400, Timon Gehr
<[email protected]> wrote:
There is no reason to prevent templates from using the
mechanism that generates only one copy. The two mechanisms
shouldn't share the same syntax, because then there is no way
to tell them apart for template functions.
You would be losing the optimization of passing primitive types
by value, wouldn't you?
Not if you keep the current `auto ref` template syntax AND
introduce another syntax `scope ref` for non-escapable references
also accepting rvalues.
