On 10/19/2016 5:26 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Right, I was arguing this for years. Using 'scope' to make the concept @safe. It seemed that it in the past the key reason for rejecting it was because it was unsafe to pass an rvalue-temp to a function where it's unknown if the function can cause it to outlive the function call... scope was the obvious resolution to that (along with a lot of other issues related to safety).
C++ has had two goes at rvalue references. Any serious proposal for that for D needs to include an analysis of what went right/wrong with the C++ one, and how the D one gets it right.
The only way to move this forward is to write a DIP. Having the various bits of information spread out over various posts for months (years?) is never going to work.
