On Thursday, 6 February 2014 at 19:01:52 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 February 2014 at 15:43:45 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
D documentation has rather incosistent naming for attribute
groups.
- scope classes are deprecated, but usage of scope as storage
class is still legal (it is expected to be a no-op for now)
Couldn't "scope" allocating a class on the stack just be
considered an optimization that can be applied if the scope
storage class become fully implemented?
I think so. Scope classes were unsafe because of leaking
references but if `scope` is actually implemented to assure
safety it becomes perfectly valid thing to do.
- scope storage class for function parameters is also accepted
as no-op. For delegates it actually has a meaning. No
deprecation.
No-op just because it hasn't been implemented yet, right?
Yes. And there is no clear definition either.
