On Thursday, 14 June 2012 at 17:58:25 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
That was just curiosity, not objection. Also, struct literal could correspond to a larger instance.On 14.06.2012 21:57, Roman D. Boiko wrote:Am I right that [2.0].ptr (instead of 2.0 could be a struct literal)doesn't involve copying, while such function would?Copying what? One word is surely cheap ;)
