On Friday, November 12, 2010 13:34:03 Pillsy wrote: > bearophile wrote: > > Pillsy: > [...] > > > > It has one other advantage, in that you can use the `scope` > > > keyword for things other than varargs, like closures. > > > > That scope syntax is already supported for closures, and it's partially > > implemented (or fully implemented, I am not sure). > > Oh, cool. I had no idea that `scope` was supported for function arguments > at all.
in is actually const scope. So void func(in Foo foo) would be void func(const scope Foo foo) I'm not quite sure how that will work with scope going away though. - Jonathan M Davis
