On 11/29/10 1:35 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 11:52:31 -0500, dsimcha <dsim...@yahoo.com> wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s
article
Ultimately I believe we need to make Rebindable palatable. That would
have the nice side effect of enabling other proxy types.
Andrei
I've asked before and I'll ask again, what's still wrong with
Rebindable? A bunch
of alias this issues got fixed in 2.050, and I fixed a bunch of misc.
convenience
issues a few releases ago. I fail to see the problem with it anymore.
Every few months or so, someone finds a problem with it. It seems that
it's good enough in theory, but miserably fails in practice when someone
tries to use it. I admit I haven't looked at it in a while, but there
are implicit casting problems that cannot be solved without compiler
help. I just think Rebindable will get more and more convoluted until
someone finally admits that this is better served as a builtin feature.
I don't grok this. If people find different issues with it that are
fixed, then there is progress, right? (Clearly "escaping" into the
language makes things better.)
One of those issues:
import std.typecons;
class C {}
void foo(Rebindable!(const C) c)
{
}
Let me fix that:
void foo(const C c)
{
auto rc = Rebindable!(const C)(c);
...
}
Andrei
