UFCS for struct opCall?

[deadalnix]

On Tuesday, 9 April 2013 at 15:56:10 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 4/9/13 11:43 AM, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 9 April 2013 at 15:29:42 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
>> wrote:
>>> They are different than regular functions by necessity. A 
>>> constructor
>>> must start on an raw object ("unprepared" in a sense) and 
>>> bring it to
>>> a meaningful state. In the case of immutable and const 
>>> objects, that
>>> grants the constructor special characteristics that are very 
>>> unlike
>>> regular functions. So they are special.
>>>
>>
>> They need magic inside, it doesn't need to leak outside.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> As now they are rvalues, this is easy to type the constructor 
>> as follow :
>>
>> struct S {
>> T t;
>>
>> this(T t) {
>> this.t = t;
>> }
>>
>> // Becomes.
>> static S __ctor(T t) {
>> S this = S.init; // Magic !!
>> this.t = t;
>> return this; // Magic !!
>> }
>> }
>>
>> The magic don't need to leak outside.
>
> I'm lost.
>
> Andrei

What I'm saying is that no magic need to be done outside the 
constructor, and it can be considered as a regular function.

For instance, in the code snippet above, the constructor can be 
translated into the __ctor function (in D like) by adding the 
magic.

This would allow to merge constructors and functions, and handle 
both the same way.