poll about delete

[Max Samukha]

On 07/28/2010 01:36 AM, Graham St Jack wrote:
> On 28/07/10 07:50, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Graham St Jack wrote:
>>> On 28/07/10 05:47, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> Max Samukha wrote:
>>>>> On 07/27/2010 10:53 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>>> and scope storage class.
>>>>>
>>>>> If scope storage class is going, we need a library equivalent. Current
>>>>> 'scoped' is not good due to 4500.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. I know how to fix it.
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>
>>> I missed the previous discussions about removing the scoped storage
>>> class. Would you mind re-stating the argument here, or post a link to
>>> it?
>>>
>>> FWIW I'm happy for delete to be removed.
>>
>> In brief scope is unsafe and impossible to make safe without extensive
>> changes to the language.
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Thanks. I definitely agree that it should go if it can't be made to work
> properly.
>

Please be careful. Safe or not, anything should go only if it have a 
reasonable replacement. We don't need a safe but useless language.