On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 at 06:50, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On 07/11/2018 11:11 AM, Atila Neves wrote: > > On Wednesday, 11 July 2018 at 07:40:32 UTC, RazvanN wrote: > >>> But there's a super explicit `@implicit` thing written right there... > >>> so should we expect that an *explicit* call to the copy constructor > >>> is not allowed? Or maybe it is allowed and `@implicit` is a lie? > >> > >> The @implicit is there to point out that you cannot call that method > >> explicitly; it gets called for you implicitly when you construct an > >> object > >> as a copy of another object. > > > > How is this different from other types of constructors or destructors? > > The main difference is that the compiler may insert calls to it implicitly.
You mean like ~this(), and op[Anything](), and front() and popFront() and empty()? I don't think we need this attribute.