Also, D already has scope classes, so why not create full
featured class bindings?
Suppose, i have this:
class A {
private:
int x;
public:
A(int x_) : x(x_) {}
A(const A& v) : x(v.x) {}
~A() {}
};
Why not interfase those as:
extern (C++) {
struct A {
int x;
this(int x_); // call c++ A::A(int)
this(this); // call c++ A::A(const A&)
~this(); // call c++ A::~A()
}
}
I mean, methods in c++ are just like functions in namespaces with
first T* argument, so this is also just mangling problem; and all
those constructors and destructors are not something special
either.
What stops to do that?
If value semantics isn't appropriate, user, who writes D
interface can just do it in scope class.
Maby discussing that would also do some good.
