On Thursday, 25 June 2015 at 08:10:06 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 17:47:51 UTC, Namespace wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 17:45:15 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 09:54:01 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 09:26:49 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
Simply give a possibility to "ref in" allowing use rvalues.
That has already been rejected.
Then we need to reconsider it. If that was several years ago,
much has changed since then.
Can you point me to that decision? Who made it, and on what
basis? I can't find anything in the threads linked in
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP36
Read the thread:
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]?page=1
Thanks. There was no link to this thread on the wiki page.
But I can't really find a definite rejection in it, in the
sense of someone with authority saying "This DIP is rejected".
The closest I can find is Andrei making some vague statements
about what is proposed being a new feature (I don't know though
whether this is an argument against the DIP), and it being
unsafe because scope is not implemented (which was true at the
time, but we now have DIP25 as a mechanism, albeit incomplete).
If you can find anything definite, can you please add it to the
wiki page? I.e. officially rejected by NN on YYYY-MM-DD
(including link), summary of the arguments for rejection, etc.
If it helps, at dconf, two years ago, when Manu tried to
repeatedly convince Walter and Andrei to have scope ref do
something similar to what we're talking about auto ref doing,
Walter and Andrei repeatedly shot it down. They had no interest
in having scope ref as any kind of special attribute. So, as of
the beginning of May 2013 (which was less than a month after what
the DIP lists as its last modification date), it was being
refused by Walter and Andrei in person. And if you look at its
revision history, Dicebot (who is one of the two authors of the
DIP) has marked it as rejected.
- Jonathan M Davis
