On Friday, 13 July 2018 at 11:02:57 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
[...]
Indeed, but this was the source of the problem also, because
you could
modify immutable fields that way.
[...]
Affirmative. The DIP needs to specify how assignment is
handled if no opAssign is present but a copy ctor is present.
Thanks!
The difference between a copy constructor and opAssign is how
the type checking
is performed. This leads to situations where a copy constructor
is not suitable as an assignment operator. However, if a copy
...
What are your opinions on this?
What about going the other way?
Can you use the unqualified opAssign as the unqualified copy
constructor?
I assume these @implicit copy constructors are normal
constructors.
