DIP 36: Rvalue References

[deadalnix]

On Saturday, 20 April 2013 at 14:42:57 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>> Yes, this temp ref issue is far more important than the ref 
>> safety issue I've been concerning myself with. I wouldn't mind 
>> if the objections I've brought up fall in favor of whatever it 
>> takes to get temp ref solved. ref safety is important, but 
>> it's nowhere near the shear *annoyingness* factor of rvalue 
>> temp refs.
> That is true, but it makes the impression that, with the 
> exception of Kenji, none of the core developers is interested 
> in a solution to this problem.
> The DIP was not much discussed and the pull request is 
> regularly overlooked / ignored.

I don't think adding more to the language is the sane thing to do 
right now.