On Thursday, 8 November 2012 at 22:44:26 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
I honestly wish that in didn't exist in the language. The fact
that it it's an alias two different attributes is confusing, and
people keep using it without realizing what they're getting
into.
If scope worked correctly, you'd only want it in specific
circumstances, not in general. And since it doesn't work
correctly
aside from delegates, once it _does_ work correctly, it'll break
code all over the place, because people keep using in, because
they like how it corresponds with out or whatever.
I agree that it may likely be a cause for future issues. I
wouldn't remove it though, rather relax it to an alias for const
only (yes, because I like how it corresponds with out (input only
vs. output only) and especially because it is very short - this
diff of 3 characters really make a difference in function
signatures :D). That'd fortunately still be possible without
breaking existing code.
So please generalize my countless mentionings of 'in ref' to
'const ref'. ;)
