On Tue, 08 Nov 2011 08:08:19 -0500, deadalnix <[email protected]> wrote:
Le 08/11/2011 02:08, Walter Bright a écrit :
http://drdobbs.com/blogs/cpp/231902461
Anyone want to do the reddit honors?
Great article. The only point I would raise is the choice of inout as a
keyword for this.
This make no sens whatsoever. Here is why :
- inout did exist in D1 and is different.
- in and out qualifier already exists and have nothing to do with inout.
- in and out are used for contracts and have nothing to do with inout.
- the inout term has nothing to do with const/immutable/mutable. This is
in a totally different lexical field.
The argument given to use inout is that it was a dead keyword (it's
totally superseded by ref).
At the time of proposal, an argument against such a feature was that
people didn't want to add any more keywords. Reusing inout keyword was a
way to cut the legs off that argument, although I would have preferred not
to use inout.
It is kind of related, as in, the qualifier you pass in becomes the
qualifier passed out.
Another keyword should be choosen. vconst, as suggested here :
http://prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel/DIPs/DIP2 is way more
appropriate.
On external details, but still important, I face the need of inout few
days ago and did knew about it. The documentation on const/immutable (
http://www.d-programming-language.org/const3.html ) doesn't mention it.
The page on fucntion mention it, but it would be nice to have at least a
link on the const/immutable page.
That documentation is not exactly documentation. It's an article on
const. I agree it needs to be updated.
-Steve
