On Thursday, 12 July 2018 at 20:29:43 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 at 23:55, RazvanN via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> What's wrong with:
> struct S {
> this(ref S copyFrom);
> }
>
> That looks like a perfectly good copy constructor
> declaration ;) I'm just saying, the DIP needs to explain
> this.
That is actually a valid constructor, according to today's
compiler. There
might be code out there that uses this syntax for the
constructor
and overnight
it will be turned into a copy constructor.
Exactly. Is that a problem?
It probably IS a copy constructor already, what else could it
be? :)
it can be something else. For example a lifo list pusher. Even if
it is considered bad design, someone might have done it
