https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23747
--- Comment #3 from RazvanN <razvan.nitu1...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Mike S from comment #2) > Ah noted, that is perhaps my mistake then. Looking at the specification > again with this in mind, I now see how 'auto ref' is deducing the 'refness' > of a function. > > This means 'auto ref' snd 'ref auto' have different meanings then to be > clear? > > - 'auto ref' deducing if it is possible to return by reference, and 'ref > auto' explicitly indicating return by reference, and deduce the type (e.g. > auto may be a double if possible return values are 1.0 and 1) No, `auto ref` or `ref auto` is the same thing. If you want to have a ref return type that is deduced you can simply omit the return type. The following example showcases that `auto ref` and `ref auto` are the same thing: // dmd -c test.d auto ref fun() { int x; return x; } ref auto fun2() { int x; return x; } int t; auto ref fun3() { return t; } ref auto fun4() { return t; } ref fun5() { return t; } ref fun6() { int x; return x; // error } pragma(msg, typeof(&fun)); pragma(msg, typeof(&fun2)); pragma(msg, typeof(&fun3)); pragma(msg, typeof(&fun4)); pragma(msg, typeof(&fun5)); --