important proposal: scope keyword for class members

[Sean Kelly]

John Simon wrote:
> Sean Kelly Wrote:
>>
>> Oh, I should mention that I'm not sure how the compiler would handle 
>> this scenario:
>>
>> class A { byte[16]; }
>> class B { byte[32]; }
>> class C {
>>      this( bool b ) {
>>          if( b ) o = new A;
>>          else    o = new B;
>>      }
>>      scope Object o;
>> }
>>
>> If I had to guess I'd say that the compiler would either reserve the max 
>> size necessary to store both A or B, or that in non-trivial cases it 
>> just wouldn't bother with reserving space for o at all.
> 
> Wrong. The Object is constructed when it comes into scope, and destructed when it leaves scope. Classes can't have an 'opAssign', instead the reference is reassigned. Since the reference is invariant/immutable here, this throws a compile time error.

I'm talking about a proposed new feature, not an existing one.  Please 
take this example in context.