On Monday, 10 December 2012 at 03:53:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/9/2012 2:10 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
You're basically suggesting that we disallow any idiom which
requires that
structs be deep copied, and I think that that's bad policy.
It's one thing to
encourage programmers to not write such structs and to use
other idioms like
COW or reference counting. It's another thing entirely to
disallow them. It's
one of C++'s prime tenets to try and not force the programmer
to program in a
certain way or in a certain paradigm, and I think that D
should do the same.
We already disallow several C++ idioms - like multiple
inheritance, using a type as both a value and a reference type,
and head const. We believe that these are bad design patterns,
despite them being used often in C++.
D didn't removed them, it replaced it with better idioms, that
still allow the valid uses and make bogus uses less likely.
Here we are talking to remove a possibility, without providing
something better.
