State of DIP 1000

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Tuesday, February 26, 2019 1:00:59 PM MST Dennis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> How is DIP 1000 doing? The document [1] says 'status: draft' and
> 'pending a rewrite', though there already is an implementation
> behind the -dip1000 flag and I've seen people using it. How much
> is implemented? Should I already compile with it and use scope?
>
> The last forum thread I found "On the future of DIP1000" [3] is
> from 2016. What's the current roadmap?
>
> Relatedly, can I already use 'in' for function parameters?
> "It is recommended to avoid using in until it is properly defined
> and implemented. Use scope const or const explicitly instead."
> [3] Is that up to date?
>
> [1] https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1000.md
> [2]
> https://forum.dlang.org/thread/taqkzwiezkfylxjinozg@forum.dlang.org?page=1
> [3] https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#param-storage

Unless something has changed recently, in doesn't mean scope at all at this
point - even with -dip1000. It was decided to not make it mean scope with
DIP 1000, because doing so would break a lot of existing code - though some
folks were very vocal in complaining about that. So, maybe that will change
(especially since DIP 1000 is already pretty disruptive as it is), but as I
understand it, even if you use -dip1000, in will mean the same thing as
const, and AFAIK, there are no plans to change that. But I haven't been
paying close attention to dmd PRs, so it's possible that something has
changed.

- Jonathan M Davis