On 6 February 2014 02:16, Dicebot <pub...@dicebot.lv> wrote: > On Wednesday, 5 February 2014 at 16:13:33 UTC, Manu wrote: > >> Huh? Why would they? They don't create cycles, and would clean up >> reliably. >> > > Because they still return T* and not RC!T ? Andrei's post speaks purely > about extra library type and does not mention about possibility to make it > default allocation type for language. > > Or it is just silently assumed? >
Dunno, but I don't think any solution which uses RC!T will ever be acceptable. It basically defeats the whole purpose.
