Move semantics, D vs. C++, ABI details

[kinke]

On Wednesday, 3 October 2018 at 20:57:39 UTC, kinke wrote:
> For DIP 1014, we (at least LDC) would most likely need to adopt 
> the C++ ABI in this regard, i.e., always pass non-PODs by 
> reference

Which would also help with C++ interop of course - while LDC's 
extern(C++) ABI was fixed wrt. passing all non-PODs by reference, 
the different destruction rules are still an issue (no 
destruction when calling a C++ function from D, and double 
destruction when calling an extern(C++) D function from C++).