On 28.04.2017 17:43, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 14:59:46 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
On Friday, 28 April 2017 at 09:40:07 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
I'm sorry, but that's just plain wrong. D does not have ownership
pointers because nobody that wants them has stepped up and
1) Done the work of drafting an informal proposal that *actually
deals with _all_ of the issues involved*
Wrong. This has been discussed and hashed out to death over and over
again. The solutions are on the table.
No. Every single thread I read in the last couple of years ended with
Walter pointing out issues that need to be "hashed out" and then nobody
doing it.
This is not the full story though. Among Walter's constraints for an
acceptable solution always were:
1. cannot add new syntax
2. cannot add polymorphism to the type system (because it is "hard to
understand")
1. is inconvenient and I think what we get with 'scope' is approximately
the best one can do given 2.
