Deprecating this(this)

[Stefan Koch]

On Wednesday, 4 April 2018 at 22:30:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/1/2018 3:49 AM, bachmeier wrote:
>> What I was wondering too. I mean, breaking changes just don't 
>> happen to this language. Now there will be, without even an 
>> indication of how existing code would have to be rewritten, or 
>> how this large-scale breakage is different than the breakages 
>> that just can't happen because reasons. I guess that's why 
>> there's always the disclaimer, "We'll only break code if 
>> there's a really good reason." That reason is "in case we want 
>> to".
>
> The idea is not to introduce a breaking change. Postblits will 
> remain. The copy constructor will be an additional construct, 
> and if one is defined, it will be preferred.
>
> Eventually (years later) postblits will be slowly deprecated 
> and eventually removed.

Could you describe how a copy constructor differs from postblit ?