Steven Schveighoffer wrote: ... > This would make destructors a lot more useful. Thoughts? > > -Steve
My first thought was that they are actually two separate functions distinguished by a boolean, then Michel also mentioned the SafeD argument. atm I think it is better to let go of the destructor entirely for anything else than the GC collecting non-gc owned data as we now have. (the unsafe version, not compilable in SafeD). Rather provide a standard interface to implement and base deterministic release of resources on that. A much more simple version of IDisposable. clear() can call this one and leave ~this alone. Anything that needs more reliability will need to use structs / reference counting.
