DIP53 and DIP49 (ver2) - New definitions for qualified constructors and postblits

Kenji Hara k.hara.pg at gmail.com
Thu Dec 19 17:39:29 PST 2013


2013/12/20 deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com>

> On Thursday, 19 December 2013 at 15:32:33 UTC, Kenji Hara wrote:
>
>> I think it is necessary small learning cost, to keep language semantics
>> simple.
>>
>> Kenji Hara
>>
>
> If that is an extra learning cost, doesn't it make the semantic more
> complex, almost by definition ?
>

I say it is small but *necessary* cost. It's not extra cost.

I'm also against adding a new meaning to const, especially when its current
> meaning can make sense.
>

These DIPs does not add a new meaning to 'const' as the type qualifier and
method qualifier. They binds new meanings to "this(this) const" and
this(...) const".
You need to learn added meaning, so it's not free, but I'd also say it's
enough trivial.

Kenji Hara
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20131220/41e482ba/attachment.html>


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list