RFC: moving forward with @nogc Phobos

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 17:13:38 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 10/1/14, 8:48 AM, Oren Tirosh wrote:
>> Bingo. Have some way to mark the function return type as a 
>> unique
>> pointer.
>
> I'm skeptical about this approach (though clearly we need to 
> explore it for e.g. passing ownership of data across threads). 
> For strings and other "casual" objects I think we should focus 
> on GC/RC strategies. This is because people do things like:
>
> auto s = setExtension(s1, s2);
>
> and then attempt to use s as a regular variable (copy it etc). 
> Making s unique would make usage quite surprising and 
> cumbersome.

Sure? I already showed in an example how it is possible to chain 
calls seamlessly that return unique objects. The users would only 
notice it when they are trying to make a real copy (i.e. not 
borrowing). Do you think this happens frequently enough to be of 
concern?