On Monday, 19 May 2014 at 10:17:17 UTC, evilrat wrote:
On Monday, 19 May 2014 at 09:56:38 UTC, bearophile wrote:
evilrat:
i may overlooked proposals for this case, if any please give
a link, sorry for possible duplicate topic.
This proposal was discussed two or three times in past, it
makes the D code look a little worse (beside being a breaking
change if you want require the ref at the calling point). But
it also makes D code a little less surprising.
the idea is just give a warning for ref if not explicitly
stated so. no code breakage should occur, only i little warning.
There is no such thing as little warning. It is always either
recognised as an error to be fixed or ignored. There is more time
to fix the code breakage but essentially it is not different from
being an error.
