`in` no longer same as `const ref`
Olivier FAURE via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Mon Jan 30 07:13:45 PST 2017
On Monday, 30 January 2017 at 13:57:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Monday, 30 January 2017 at 00:26:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> I was afraid that by checking it, too much code would break.
>
> Code that was using it improperly was *already* broken. Now,
> the compiler will simply tell them, at compile time, why
> instead of letting it silently accept undefined behavior.
Well, it's a trade-off. Some people would rather their project
with potentially broken code does not stop compiling because they
upgraded their compiler.
Although I guess you could solve this by having -dip1000 emit
only warnings and no error until the adaptation period had passed.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list