The next iteration of scope

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 1 April 2015 at 23:03:02 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Walter Bright:
>
>> I'm thinking of a modest step which would be a subset of your 
>> proposal:
>>
>> 1. implement 'scope' and 'return' for arrays, classes, and 
>> pointers
>> 2. implement inference for templates and lambdas
>> 3. enable it with the -dip25 switch
>>
>> and see how far that takes us.
>
> This is interesting. For the final D programmer what's the 
> practical difference between your proposed subset compared to 
> the full proposal?

The main difference is that `@safe` doesn't imply `scope` 
anymore, which means a bit more typing. It also makes `static` 
annotations unnecessary.

I'm fine with that, because I only suggested it to reduce the 
need for explicit annotations, as Walter said that's important 
for him. Of course, it would also raise the risk of breaking 
existing code considerably, so that the potential benefits may 
not pull their weight overall.

But I hope overloading is included under point 1. It's very 
important for efficiency.