Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Joel C. Salomon wrote: >> Just as (1) & (2) point to a way to remove the “magic” of built-in >> arrays & hash-tables, so too might (5) & (6) point to a way of replacing >> the “new T(args)” syntax with something cleaner? Not that >> “new!(T)(args)” looks nicer than the current syntax, but is it perhaps a >> better fit with the rest of the language? > > I agree. new sucks. > > Andrei
Oh I don't know, I rather like being able to allocate stuff on the heap. I mean, if I didn't, the poor heap would probably be very lonely. Poor, poor oft-maligned heap; all because he's a bit slower than stack allocation and needs to be cleaned up after. He's trying to help, you know! Joking aside, what do you have in mind? Every solution I come up with ends up being more or less the same (except with the 'new' keyword in a different place) or worse. -- Daniel
