On 2/25/20 10:13 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 February 2020 at 13:39:40 UTC, Aliak wrote:
I should’ve been more specific 😬 I was wondering if the same could be
achieved without a introducing a new aggregate type!
Well, compiler magic, possibly with more @attributes. But that gets far
messier than a simple struct, so we rejected it in the other thread.
I just added a section to my dip text explaining this though:
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/186/files#diff-2d3c5bf5c5d1f001279a15e3449b2338R325
basically once we address all the inevitable questions such a new thing
would raise, we would essentially reinvent a struct with a new, awkward
syntax anyway.
So my view is a struct is a simple, understandable, and proven solution.
I think it's important that the compiler isn't involved with type
construction, just lowering. It keeps things simple in the compiler.
-Steve
