My thoughts & tries with rvalue references

[Benjamin Thaut]

Am 30.03.2013 12:04, schrieb Namespace:
>> I have to agree on that. My first impression was that ref& is equal to
>> c++11 &&
>>
>> Kind Regards
>> Benjamin Thaut
>
> Ok, it seems that I think differently.
> And what is the general opinion of '&A' instead of 'ref &A'?
> It has all the benefits that I described in my first post, but it may
> not be so confusing.
> If you like to ask "why not A&": That is more complex as it seems to be,
> a opinion which is shared by Jonathan.
> And I sincerely hope that no one is annoyed about my attempts to solve
> this problem.

No I highly appreciate it, that you are trying to solve the problem. The 
current state of the language on this is annoying and it needs to be fixed.

I personally would like &A the question is if this is the "D-Way". Maybe 
we should add a new keyword like "vref" for "value reference".

Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut