On 2013-08-03 00:51:19 +0000, F i L said:
I've brought this up on here awhile ago, and many people seemed to be
against it. Which I don't agree with, since the ambiguities it creates
are easily addressed (from a design perspective at least) and only
exist so that C-style code is usable within D. It could work like:
auto func(a, b) // auto func(A, B)(A a, B b)
auto func(int a, b) // auto func(B)(int a, B b)
auto func(int ?) // C-style: auto func(int)
Or...
auto func(auto a, auto b) // like C++14
I mean honestly, who's hand-writing a bunch of functions with nameless
params in real D code? Sure it's used for linking to C, which is
semi-common, but I think having the much cleaner syntax available to
"actual" D code makes more sense that not having it solely for
linking-to-C-in-familiar-C-style reasons.
The converse question is who's hand-writing a bunch of functions that
don't need their arguments' types in any way (for constraints or
otherwise). There are very few functions that really apply to all
types. It's possible that by allowing auto parameter types we encourage
a sloppy style.
Andrei
