DIP 1003 Formal Review
Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sun May 14 06:55:44 PDT 2017
On 5/14/17 9:24 AM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote:
>
> By making body optional and a contextual keyword there should be no
> breaking changes (except for obscure code like `static assert
> (!__traits(compiles, { mixin ("int body;"); }))` :D).
It doesn't even need to be optional. It can be required as it is now
(when in/out are specified), just not a keyword. I believe that this is
what is specified in Option 1 of the DIP.
-Steve
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list