DIP 1016--ref T accepts r-values--Formal Assessment

Don 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 mailing list