Beta 2.072.0-b2

[Sönke Ludwig via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Am 10.10.2016 um 12:20 schrieb Martin Nowak:
> On Monday, 10 October 2016 at 09:03:53 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
>> Of course, the new error is more restrictive than it should be, namely
>> if the uninitialized pointer field gets written before the first read,
>> it would still be safe.
>
> That's surprising b/c void initializers for struct fields didn't use to
> work.

Hm, thanks for the hint - if that's still the case, that leads to the 
very simple workaround of simply removing the "= void". Would have been 
nice in theory to have real void initialization of course, plus it was 
there for working around that (fixed?) issue with slow compilation times 
for large static arrays, but there is probably no real reason now to 
keep it.

> I need to research the intent behind this to say sth. detailed, though
> usually an shouldn't break working code, only deprecate it.