This has probably been brought up before, but given that the lack of default constructors for structs was a major problem for the QtD folks, I've been thinking about the problem again, and I was wondering whether it would work to have default constructors for structs as long as they were pure? Isn't the main problem with having default constructors for structs that the default constructor must result in the same value every time so that the compiler can set init appropriately? Or is there something else to it? It does seem to me that we should get default constructors for structs to work if we can. It's obviously been causing a problem in real code, including for major projects like QtD.
- Jonathan M Davis
