Proposal : allocations made easier with non nullable types.

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Daniel Keep" <daniel.keep.lists at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:gmrfe8$10l4$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Daniel Keep" <daniel.keep.lists at gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:gmpd71$8uj$1 at digitalmars.com...
>
> Took me a while to find it, even knowing what it was about.  Ended up
> having to manually go through the digitalmars.com archives. :P
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/38329.html
>
> It's probably somewhat anachronistic now.  For anyone who isn't aware,
> back in the old days, 'scope' was 'auto' whilst 'auto' was 'auto.'  It
> sort of did two things and was a bit confusing.  Just replace 'auto'
> with 'scope' and you should be fine.  :P
>

Interesting. I'd love to see this get some more attention and discussion 
simply because what you had said earlier is also one of my own pet peeves 
about D, and I couldn't have descrbed it any better than you did:

>>> Given that one of D's tenets is to make it simpler to write
>>> deterministic, bullet-proof code, the complete lack of deterministic
>>> destruction of classes has always felt like a huge hole in the language.