DIP27 available for destruction

Dicebot m.strashun at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 09:09:29 PST 2013


I like overall approach and think it really should be rule of a 
thumb for designing D features - defining simple bullet-proof 
semantics and making conclusions from it. As opposed to 
syntax-based special case coverage.

What I do find lacking in this DIP:

1) "Optional parentheses" part needs detailed description why 
exactly those cases have special handling and how are they 
different from others. Also looks like example code has errors 
there, for example, function that has no return statement and 
uint return type.

2) If you want to prohibit functions having an address, you need 
a section explaining communication with C in details in regard to 
passing function pointers.

3) It really needs a broad overview of semantic changes in common 
use cases and code breakage list.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list