But it may not even end up being the case that using auto ref
on non-templated
functions is the solution. It may end up being something else
entirely.
Ignoring @safety issues, it seems to me like it would be the
most
straightforward solution, but there are @safety issues with ref
in general
that need to be addressed, and Andrei intends to address them
as part of
whatever happens with auto ref. That mean that auto ref gets
used for non-
templated functions, or it could mean something very different.
I don't know
what exactly the solution that Andrei is working on could
entail. For all I
know, it'll involve letting ref in general accept rvalues (much
as I tihnk
that that's a horrible idea, it _has_ been suggested before).
So, without a
clear idea of what we're going to want to do, merging in the
pull request
which makes auto ref work for non-templated functions is a bad
idea. It could
ultimately end up being fine, or it could end up breaking more
code when the
real solution gets implemented.
- Jonathan M Davis
Ehh, so if auto ref won't be the solution, we then have auto ref
for template functions and another solution for non-ref
functions? I don't think that that is a smart idea and that it
would be a kind of inconsistent.
