DIP69 - Implement scope for escape proof references

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 10 December 2014 at 15:15:59 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 December 2014 at 21:58:48 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> That why i say they are linked. I don't think your way of 
>> stating
>> it contradict what I said.
>>
>> scope allow for manipulation of data without owning them.
>> Whatever the owner is (be it the stack frame or anything else)
>> doesn't really matter here.
>
> It does when you return parts of it, like if you pass in a 
> binary tree and return a node. Which you have to be able to do 
> for the concept to make sense.
>
> When you solve issues in language design you should address the 
> hard issues first, because the easy issues will then tend to 
> resolve themselves if the design is good. If you start with 
> "the low hanging fruit" you end up with pointless special 
> casing… D is already in that landscape and should try hard not 
> to sink deeper into the muddy waters.
>
> I posit that if you have a solution for ownership/retaining 
> references then the solution for scope will come from this as a 
> side-effect.

That is completely off topic. this is a function parameter, you
can return scope, and you don't need to know who own the
container for that to work.

Granted, the current proposal lack the horsepower to do so.