On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 06:34:04 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
On 23/08/18 09:17, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 05:37:12 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
One that hurt me lately was a way to pass a scoped lazy
argument (i.e. - to specify that the implicit delegate need
not allocate its frame, because it is not used outside the
function call).
I don't see why we just can't add support for scoped lazy
parameters. It's already in the language just with a different
syntax (delegates). That would probably be an easy fix (last
famous words :)). I guess it would be better if it could be
inferred.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
Here's the interesting question, though: is this *going* to
happen?
We've known about this problem for ages now. No movement.
It's on my todo list, however I've instead been doomed to work on
higher priority things.
More generally though, some time should be spent on trying out
things in the spirit of "will it blend" just to see what happens.
Putting effort towards having a more homogeneous environment in
the language should in the long run pay its dividends.
Some of the other problems are considerably less easy to fix.
Examples:
A struct may be @disabled this(this), @disable this() and/or
@disable init. Can you say that libraries..
Actually, strike that.
Can you say that the *standard* libraries work with all 8
combinations?
The same goes for using shared, immutable and const against the
standard library.
Iain
