On 8/28/2018 6:12 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
So this would mean a member function would have to be refactored into a
different function with a different calling syntax. i.e:
x.foo(target);
would have to be refactored to:
target.foo(x);
or foo(target, x);
Maybe it should be anyway.
But in terms of put, strictly speaking, any call of some.pipeline.put(x) is
wrong. It should be put(some.pipeline, x), to avoid issues with how put was
designed.
There are some of those in Phobos, too. It's covered by the proposed addition.
I don't know how to prove anything with programming languages.
I don't mean prove like mathematical proof. I mean try to consider how this
affects all cases instead of just the one case that will make phobos compile.
"show" is a better verb than "prove".
I don't know how to find all cases, either, except by implementing it.
