On Fri, 13 Jul 2018 at 04:05, RazvanN via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > > [...] > > The problem with this approach is that some copy constructors > will also be used as assignment operators while others will not, > but with good error messages it could be handled (error on line > `f = d` : opAssign not specified and the copy constructor is not > suitable for assignments because it modifies immutable field `b`). > > What are your opinions on this?
Right; I figure, if the struct contains members that can't be copied, then the struct is defined in such a way that it simply can't be copied. I mean, if the copy constructor can't be used to copy the thing, then is copying the struct valid at all? What would a valid copy operation on a struct with an immutable field do? Either way, in that case, a good error should inform the user they need to write an explicit opAssign.
