D 2015/2016 Vision?

[bitwise via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 16:14:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 15:59:23 UTC, bitwise wrote:
>> Again, it's much easier to be careful about this when the 
>> author's intent is baked into the class.
>
> That may be, but my point was that it doesn't actually 
> guarantee that the object is going to be destroyed 
> determinstically. That's going to require that the programmer 
> using the object know that it's designed to be destroyed 
> deterministically and program accordingly. Having it be easier 
> for the programmer to figure out whether an object was designed 
> that way is definitely a plus, but it doesn't make it so that 
> they don't have to worry about it.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

True. I agree with you on this.

All the time, this idea comes to mind when I see people arguing 
back and forth, thinking that they will eventually converge on 
some perfectly ideal solution which obviates the need for any 
real effort.

      Bit