Copy Constructor DIP and implementation
Nicholas Wilson
iamthewilsonator at hotmail.com
Thu Sep 13 00:05:23 UTC 2018
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 23:55:05 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
> The bog-standard way of dealing with avoidable breakage with
> DIPs is a -dip-10xx flag. In this case, if set, would prefer to
> call copy constructors over blit + postblit.
>
> Also adding @implicit is a backwards incompatible change to a
> codebase that wants to use it as it will cause it to fail on
> older compilers. Even if one does :
>
> static if (__VERSION__ < 2085) // or whenever it gets
> implemented
> enum implicit;
> all over the place,
>
>> It is illegal to declare a copy constructor for a struct that
>> has a postblit defined and vice versa:
Hmm, I suppose one could
static if (__VERSION__ < 2085)
// use a postblit
else
// use a copy ctor.
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list