On Sunday, 19 May 2013 at 04:57:15 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/18/2013 8:54 PM, deadalnix wrote:
On Sunday, 19 May 2013 at 01:20:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I understand that. But the rationale you gave for having a
default constructor
was to be able to disable default construction.
RAII or construction based on template parameters.
I know what default constructors are used for in C++. That
wasn't what I asked, though. I asked for compelling rationale.
I have bunch of code that goes like :
auto oldVar = var;
scope(exit) var = oldVar;
This is begging for a RAII solution where I pass var as template
parameter but would require default constructor. This is an
actual problem I have right now as all save/restore are harder
and harder to keep in sync for no reason and generate a lot of
boilerplate.
This is a problem I have right now that default constructor would
solve, and this isn't the first time I hit that need.
