On 8/23/2013 5:44 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I've written up a proposal to solve the partially-constructed object
problem[*] in D in a very nice way by extending scope guards:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP44
Not a bad idea, but it has some issues:
1. scope(failure) takes care of most of it already
2. I'm not sure this is a problem that needs solving, as the DIP points out,
these issues are already easily dealt with. We should be conservative about
adding more syntax.
3. What if the destructor needs to do more than just unwind the transactions?
Where does that code fit in?
4. The worst issue is the DIP assumes there is only one constructor, from which
the destructor is inferred. What if there is more than one constructor?
