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