What is the case against a struct post-blit default constructor?

[Gor Gyolchanyan]

I agree. AFAIK, D's policy is "give a safe default and a back door around
it".

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:25 AM, F i L <witte2008 at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 to all of that.
>
> If the only issue is performance, I think the best solution is just to
> Document with a warning against using default constructors in performance
> critical structs.
>



-- 
Bye,
Gor Gyolchanyan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20121009/c3b6e95c/attachment.html>