On 23 April 2013 21:32, Timon Gehr <timon.g...@gmx.ch> wrote: > On 04/23/2013 09:07 AM, Namespace wrote: > >> On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 03:30:35 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: >> >>> Previous discussions: >>> >>> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/**4F84D6DD.5090405@digitalmars.** >>> com#post-4F84D6DD.5090405:**40digitalmars.com<http://forum.dlang.org/thread/4f84d6dd.5090...@digitalmars.com#post-4F84D6DD.5090405:40digitalmars.com> >>> >>> >>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/**show_bug.cgi?id=9238<http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9238> >>> >> >> I still like the Idea of DIP 36 (http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP36) with scope >> ref / in ref. ... >> > > That's fine. I don't. >
Can you suggest a superior/more sensible approach? I can't see the fault in DIP36's reasoning. It just makes sense. Why is everyone so against it? I'm yet to understand a reason...