Type Qualifiers and Wild Cards

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 08-11-2011 15:02, Gor Gyolchanyan wrote:
>> Well use of auto can be ambiguous here I think.
>
> I'm not sure, frankly. We should consult with Walter and co. because
> they have a better idea about syntax readability.

I know I wouldn't enjoy typing three keywords on a single parameter. :)

>
>> What about auto const ref ?
>
> That will force you to have both auto const and auto ref at the same time.
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM, deadalnix<deadalnix at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Le 08/11/2011 14:36, Gor Gyolchanyan a écrit :
>>>
>>> I agree with _inout_ being a bad choice.
>>> I'd rather use something involving _auto_, because this kind of use of
>>> _auto_ is already employed in _auto ref_ parameters and is visually
>>> unambiguous.
>>> Probably _auto const_ would do the trick.
>>>
>>> The actual _inout_ keyword could be flagged as deprecated and removed
>>> during the next breaking change in D (along with all other wonderful
>>> breaking changes that were proposed).
>>>
>>
>> Well use of auto can be ambiguous here I think.
>>
>> What about auto const ref ?
>>

- Alex