On 7/14/18 11:26 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On Friday, 13 July 2018 at 01:18:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/12/18 2:30 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
You're still potentially changing the semantics of existing code.
`@implicit` can be a UDA today:
----
enum implicit = 0;
struct C
{
@implicit this(ref C another) {}
}
----
Today, that's a normal constructor. With the DIP, it becomes a copy
constructor.
That is correct and a liability of the current DIP. That should be
mentioned in it.
That's easily fixed by implementing a compiler recognized UDA. That
would mean that it would only be a copy constructor if "implicit" is
defined in core.attribute. This would also avoid any special syntax in
the parser. The already existing @selector is implemented like this.
Affirmative. We're going that route, similar to "@safe" and "@nogc".