Proposal: new variable definition operator

[jovo]

Daniel Keep Wrote:
> 
> Just want to nitpick one thing: you seem to think that "auto" is the
> type inference keyword.  It isn't.  In D, a declaration is made up of
> four parts: the storage class, the type, the identifier and the initialiser.
> 
> Obviously the identifier always needs to be there.  If omitted, the
> initialiser is just type.init.
> 
> Storage class and type are the interesting ones.  In C, you could always
> omit the storage class if it was just a regular variable, but always had
> to specify the type.  D allows you to omit the type if and only if you
> specify the storage class.  Guess what the default storage class is?
> 
> auto.
> 
> Type inference in D isn't "type inference triggered by keyword", it's
> "type inference by omission."  "auto" is only required so that the D
> grammar can tell it's supposed to be an declaration.
> 

What is a meaning of auto as storage class specifier in D? 
In C it signifyes an automatic variable (hence auto) with clear
definition.

C++ faces similar problem introducing type inference via auto.
They will clear auto from list of storage class specifiers.
Just reusing old keyword with new meaning.

jovo