Article about problems & suggestions for D 2.0

[David Nadlinger]

On 8/28/11 10:17 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/28/2011 12:44 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> I know that this is not the general consensus, but I very much like
>> the C++
>> casting operators, because you can quickly get a rough idea what is
>> going on
>> when you see a cast in the code, whereas for D, cast() be anything
>> between a
>> perfectly harmless downcast (if checking for null, obviously),
>> changing the
>> storage class (const/immutable/shared), or causing the bytes stored to be
>> interpreted in a completely different way!
>
> To cast away const, use:
>
> cast()expr
>
> i.e. there is a special syntax for it.

I know about the »it's not a bug, it's a feature« cast() syntax 
officially added some three (?) months ago, but it should be noted that 
it also removes shared from the type (incidentally, const_cast removes 
volatile as well).

Personally, I think that being explicit about the type of operation one 
intends to perform is a good thing, especially if you are about to 
subvert the type system. Still, I feel using my own custom set of 
casting templates would be too confusing for other people reading my 
code – would anybody else be interested in adding »restricted« casting 
templates to Phobos?

David