On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:58:11 UTC, bauss wrote:
So now "in" is basically just an alias and serves no real
purpose or is there a plan to eventually make "in" mean
something other than just "const"?
At this point it's the spec that serves no real purpose,
sometimes in is scope,
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 16:16:15 Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > it was deemed too dangerous to have in suddenly really mean
> > both scope and const, because it would potentially break a lot
> > of code.
>
>
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 03:27:07AM -0600, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
>
> Because scope has mostly done nothing (it only affected delegates), in has
> effectively been const without scope for its entire existence in D2 in spite
> of the fact that it was supposed to be the
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 04:16:15PM +, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > it was deemed too dangerous to have in suddenly really mean both
> > scope and const, because it would potentially break a lot of code.
>
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
it was deemed too dangerous to have in suddenly really mean
both scope and const, because it would potentially break a lot
of code.
To be frank, this pisses me off to a ridiculous extent because if
it "breaks" at all... THAT
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 11:24:01 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:58:11 bauss via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> [...]
So now "in" is basically just an alias and serves no real
purpose or is there
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 11:24:01 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:58:11 bauss via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:15:43 Boris-Barboris via
>
> Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:58:11 bauss via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:15:43 Boris-Barboris via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> >> Hello! Can someone point me to the changelong entry or
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:15:43 Boris-Barboris via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hello! Can someone point me to the changelong entry or maybe a
pull request, wich changed the "in" from "scope const" to
"const"? I thought the
On Tuesday, 27 March 2018 at 09:27:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:15:43 Boris-Barboris via Now that
DIP 1000 is being implemented, and scope is actually going to
do something for more than just delegates, it was deemed too
dangerous to have in suddenly really
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 09:15:43 Boris-Barboris via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> Hello! Can someone point me to the changelong entry or maybe a
> pull request, wich changed the "in" from "scope const" to
> "const"? I thought the previous matter of things was pretty
> natural, and current "in"
Hello! Can someone point me to the changelong entry or maybe a
pull request, wich changed the "in" from "scope const" to
"const"? I thought the previous matter of things was pretty
natural, and current "in" is now redundant. Would be glad to read
up on this design decision.
12 matches
Mail list logo