Copy Constructor DIP

[Luís Marques]

On Thursday, 12 July 2018 at 15:25:10 UTC, Luís Marques wrote:
> On Thursday, 12 July 2018 at 15:14:19 UTC, Luís Marques wrote:
> BTW: Multiple alias this is still planned for inclusion in D, 
> right? If so, what would be the (pratical?) difference between 
> having copy ctors with such a relaxed type requirement and just 
> defining an equivalent alias this method? In case the answer is 
> that there's no significant difference, why not drop multiple 
> alias this, then?

Sorry for the stream-of-conscience type posts. But, to clarify 
further: if alias this provides access to the members of the 
converted type (besides type conversion), couldn't that feature 
be folded into the same mechanism of the copy ctor (or 
vice-versa), to avoid mostly redundant features in the language, 
with subtle interactions?