On 28 January 2015 at 14:57, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > We are going to introduce 2 features that basically are 2 hacks working > around the same problem : lifetime. > > It may sound like any of these is useful and progress, and somehow it is, > but that is going to create many feature for underpowered capabilities. > > This is this kind of situation where simple and easy collide. > > I'd suggest we get a proper lifetime management. For ref return, we can > still make it safe by defining the lifetime of the ref return as the > intersection of the lifetime of the ref parameters and call it a day. As far > as I can tell, this cover the vast majority of cases.
Lifetime 'this' probably also needs to exist, for objects that return members by ref. I think this covers practically all useful cases. What problem cases remain? Returning a global by ref? I should think that can also be supported easily enough; return by ref without lifetime implies global lifetime, and the function would compile error when trying to return a local/member/argument that way. I agree with you. I'm completely unsatisfied with the current proposals, or 'plans', as I think they have been promoted.
