DIP 1016--ref T accepts r-values--Formal Assessment
donald at gmail.com
Wed Jan 30 16:47:48 UTC 2019
On Wednesday, 30 January 2019 at 13:58:38 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> I do not accept gut feeling as a valid objection here. The
> current workarounds is shown to be painful as shown in the dip
> and in the discussions that it currently link. That *the*
> motivation here.
Like I said previously I am on the reviews side and that's it.
By the way I don't like your tone when you say: "I do not accept
gut feeling as a valid objection here".
I don't think you would like if I say that your opinion is biased
because you know the author either, so don't go that way, because
it's not only me against this DIP.
> I am familiar with the author here, he is very involved with
> the C++<->D compatibility side of things. He knows the pain
> from first hand experience.
Alright we're talking about a change that have been on hold for
almost 10 years, if it was simple it would already been done.
In this thread we saw some other concerns been emerged.
Finally I only know the author by his postings in this forum, and
I don't have anything personally against him.
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce