On Saturday, 30 March 2013 at 13:07:44 UTC, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Am 30.03.2013 12:04, schrieb Namespace:
I have to agree on that. My first impression was that ref& is
equal to
c++11 &&
Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut
Ok, it seems that I think differently.
And what is the general opinion of '&A' instead of 'ref &A'?
It has all the benefits that I described in my first post, but
it may
not be so confusing.
If you like to ask "why not A&": That is more complex as it
seems to be,
a opinion which is shared by Jonathan.
And I sincerely hope that no one is annoyed about my attempts
to solve
this problem.
No I highly appreciate it, that you are trying to solve the
problem. The current state of the language on this is annoying
and it needs to be fixed.
I personally would like &A the question is if this is the
"D-Way". Maybe we should add a new keyword like "vref" for
"value reference".
Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut
Although adding new keywords is not smiled upon at this point, it
might actually be worth it in this case.
