Would this be a useful construct to add to D? auto for constructor call.

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Tuesday, 23 January 2024 at 11:11:00 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
> On Tuesday, 23 January 2024 at 06:30:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
> wrote:
>> That being said, I expect that it would be pretty easy to 
>> write a mixin to do something like that if you really wanted 
>> to. Also, if you're simply looking to not have to name the 
>> type, you could do
>>
>> dataGrid = new typeof(datagrid)(15);
>>
>
> You like to turn off people before they get the chance to 
> develop further, this is bad

Would you like to encourage proposals/work/effort that will 
ultimately not be accepted? I don't. I would rather tell someone 
no early than tell them no later. And I agree with Jonathan, zero 
proposals that infer type from how they are used have been 
accepted by Walter, this one probably will be no different.

To the OP, I think the value of the feature needs to be more than 
just avoiding repeating the name of the type.

You also can do some library tricks (unfortunately this won't 
count as construction, but probably is fine in most cases)

```d
auto create(T, Args...)(out T val, Args args)
{
    static if(is(T == class))
       val = new T(args);
    else static if(...) // do eveyrything else.
}

...

dataGrid.create(15);
```

-Steve