auto, var, raii,scope, banana

[Hasan Aljudy]

vote++;
//me likes

kris wrote:
> Don has a good point: changing to "var" would cause conflict with 
> existing variable-names.
> 
> Chad et. al. also have a good point about the conflict regarding static 
> opCall() (via the lack of a "new" keyword). I suspect many people find 
> the use of "new" to be indicative of allocation, and breaking this 
> consistency may have a detrimental effect? Further, it was noted that a 
> missing "new" can only be used at the instantiation site -- not at the 
> class decl -- thus, D would be losing an existing feature.
> 
> I suspect you could count the current number of raii-class uses on a few 
> hands, whereas the use of "auto" for implied-type is pretty darned 
> popular -- and rightly so, since it's really very, very useful. Changing 
> the raii style to use a different keyword, whilst retaining implied-type 
> "auto" would be an almost imperceptible change?
> 
> Thus, it would appear to make sense to retain "auto" for implied-type, 
> and introduce something *else* for automatic cleanup at end-of-scope 
> (and also as a class attribute). how about reusing the "scope" keyword?
> 
> void main()
> {
>   auto i = 10;
>   auto foo = new Foo;
>   auto scope bar = new Bar;
>   auto scope wumpus = new Wumpus;
> }
> 
> class Foo {}
> 
> class Bar {}
> 
> scope class Wumpus {}
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>