2013/11/11 Daniel Davidson <nos...@spam.com> > From this thread (http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.89.1383248384.9546. > digitalmars-d-le...@puremagic.com) I was under the impression that > const/immutable and postblits don't mix. This DIP seems to be trying to > address that. One of the potential workarounds to this issue was the idea > of struct copy constructors. This is what I was referring to. With this > proposal, is there still a need for struct copy constructors? >
1.5 years ago, I did asked to Andrei about the postbit issue. <http://forum.dlang.org/thread/CAFDvkcvvL8GxHQB=Rw9pTm-uxOKzNGVQNDv9w5Os3SkQCc=d...@mail.gmail.com> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/CAFDvkcvvL8GxHQB=Rw9pTm-uxOKzNGVQNDv9w5Os3SkQCc=d...@mail.gmail.com Andrei had thought that the issue will be fixed by adding "copy constructor" in D. However I believed that the postblit concept would be able to improved more. So I couldn't convince about his thought. DIP49 is the final conclusion of my belief. I can say that copy constructor is unnecessary in D. Kenji Hara
