Is D 0.163 D 1.0?

[Chris Nicholson-Sauls]

Andrei Khropov wrote:
> And what about double meaning of 'auto'?
> 
> It's a longstanding issue and changes could break lots of code, but I think it's
> a terrible design inconsistency.
> 
> And it also currently means that we cannot use type inference with auto classes
> (which is also inconsistensy by itself)
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> import std.stdio;
> 
> auto class X
> {
> public:
>     int _i;
>     
>     this(int i1)
>     {
>         _i = i1;
>     }
>     
>     int i()
>     {
>         return _i;
>     }
>     
>     ~this()
>     {
>       writefln("destructor i=",_i); 
>     }
> }
> 
> void main()
> {
>     auto X x1 = new X(1);
>     
>     //auto auto x2 = new X(2); // auto1.d(28): redundant storage class 'auto'
>     
>     // auto x3 = new X(3); // auto1.d(30): variable auto1.main.x3 reference to
> auto class must be auto
>     
>     writefln("x1.i=",x1.i);
>     //writefln("x2.i=",x2.i);
>     //writefln("x3.i=",x3.i);
> }
> ---------------------------------------------------
> 
> Some discussion was here: 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?digitalmars.D/38443
> 
> (I personally vote for 'var' for type inference)
> 

Agreed, and I've caught myself more than once starting to type this "auto auto" mess.  And 
I also agree with "var" as a good choice for doing this.  I'm already used to using "var" 
in other platforms, including PHP, ECMAScript, and my own Bovis language.

##### PHP
# class Foo {
#   var $someField = 42 ;
# }

##### ECMAScript
# var x = 27 ;

##### Bovis
# var 'Any $foo = 99 ; // the 'Any specifier is optional, of course

And I believe this is what is used in the new edition of C# for type inference, yes?  (I 
haven't touched C# since the 1.0 so someone let me know if I'm wrong.)  Precedence has 
been established for it.  It shouldn't be un-intuitive to many people.

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls