On 24 April 2013 01:01, deadalnix <deadal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 14:38:12 UTC, Dicebot wrote: > >> On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 14:28:54 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> >>> If it were about scope it would be very careful with lifetime of >>> temporaries. >>> >>> Andrei >>> >> >> Please explain. In its current form DIP36 only cares that passed >> temporary exists while called function is executed. I can't imagine any >> sane lifetime rules that would result in violating this. >> > > This isn't enough for a DIP. You have to explicitly define the lifetime, > as it is required to know what is safe and what isn't, to get deterministic > destruction, or whatever. >
"The r-value being passed is assigned to a stack allocated temporary, which has a lifetime that is identical to any other local variable, ie, the lifetime of the function in which it appears." There, I defined it.
