auto ref - again

[Namespace]

> But it may not even end up being the case that using auto ref 
> on non-templated
> functions is the solution. It may end up being something else 
> entirely.
> Ignoring @safety issues, it seems to me like it would be the 
> most
> straightforward solution, but there are @safety issues with ref 
> in general
> that need to be addressed, and Andrei intends to address them 
> as part of
> whatever happens with auto ref. That mean that auto ref gets 
> used for non-
> templated functions, or it could mean something very different. 
> I don't know
> what exactly the solution that Andrei is working on could 
> entail. For all I
> know, it'll involve letting ref in general accept rvalues (much 
> as I tihnk
> that that's a horrible idea, it _has_ been suggested before). 
> So, without a
> clear idea of what we're going to want to do, merging in the 
> pull request
> which makes auto ref work for non-templated functions is a bad 
> idea. It could
> ultimately end up being fine, or it could end up breaking more 
> code when the
> real solution gets implemented.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Ehh, so if auto ref won't be the solution, we then have auto ref 
for template functions and another solution for non-ref 
functions? I don't think that that is a smart idea and that it 
would be a kind of inconsistent.