DIP25 draft available for destruction

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 01:06:34 -0500, Walter Bright  
<newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:

>
> The only time (now) that you can take the address of function return  
> value is if that is a return by ref. So, if taking the address of a ref  
> is disallowed, then the syntax is no longer ambiguous.

Thinking about this, I don't know that I like the idea of disallowing  
taking the address of ref.

One major usage of taking the address of ref returns is the opIndex  
operator:

int *ptr = &arr[0];

Or, more generally, the front property of a range:

int *ptr = &arr.front;

What I am concerned about is that this is not going to have the desired  
effect.  Instead of grudgingly switching to a new style of coding, people  
will simply return pointers instead of ref.

-Steve