On Saturday, 13 September 2014 at 01:49:05 UTC, Manu via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 12 September 2014 18:06, via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, 11 September 2014 at 20:45:09 UTC, Marc Schütz
wrote:
I've addressed this in the Wiki now. There were only a few
changes to be
made to move away from type modifiers. I had even suggested it
as an
implementation detail, but didn't think of making it part of
the
specification. Thank you for that insight, it makes the
proposal more
consistent and avoids the troubles with the types.
I'm not convinced this is a good change.
It sounds like you're just trading one problem with another
more sinister
problem...
What happens when a scope() thing finds it's way into generic
code? If the
type doesn't carry that information, then you end up in a
situation like
ref. Have you ever had to wrestle with ref in generic code?
ref is the biggest disaster zone in D, and I think all it's
problems will
translate straight to scope if you do this.
Could you give an example?
