On Wednesday, 4 April 2018 at 22:30:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/1/2018 3:49 AM, bachmeier wrote:
What I was wondering too. I mean, breaking changes just don't
happen to this language. Now there will be, without even an
indication of how existing code would have to be rewritten, or
how this large-scale breakage is different than the breakages
that just can't happen because reasons. I guess that's why
there's always the disclaimer, "We'll only break code if
there's a really good reason." That reason is "in case we want
to".
The idea is not to introduce a breaking change. Postblits will
remain. The copy constructor will be an additional construct,
and if one is defined, it will be preferred.
Eventually (years later) postblits will be slowly deprecated
and eventually removed.
Could you describe how a copy constructor differs from postblit ?
