still confused about call by reference

[Jarrett Billingsley]

"Hoenir" <mrmocool at gmx.de> wrote in message 
news:fg7o1e$2lhs$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> I think the opCall needs to be declared static.
>>
> opCall is used here as a "constructor" for that struct. Thus declaring it 
> static doesn't make any sense to me. Are you sure it must be static?

This is the stupid compromise that we got instead of struct ctors in D1. 
Use a static opCall, Walter says, it'll get optimized out.  That's great, 
but it makes it impossible to initialize an instance of a struct on the heap 
without factoring out the initialization to _another_ function, and it's 
just another stupid inconsistency which we'll have to live with even though 
D2 will have struct ctors.  *sigh*

You cacn read all about it in "Dynamic Initializaion of Structs" here: 
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/struct.html