DIP25 draft available for destruction

[Zach the Mystic]

On Wednesday, 6 February 2013 at 17:50:06 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
>> A good part of that is the recent debate on what &func should 
>> do (take
>> the address of the function vs. the address of its result). 
>> With the
>> unsafe meaning out of the way, only the safe one is eligible.
>
> Added a dedicated section to the DIP: http://goo.gl/xkIXb
>
> Andrei

As per your encouragement to me, I suggest using 'opAddress' 
instead of 'addressOf' to allow future compatibility with structs.