DIP 1022---foreach auto ref---Community Review Round 2

Walter Bright newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Wed Oct 23 09:27:32 UTC 2019

On 10/22/2019 8:55 PM, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Sunday, 20 October 2019 at 16:47:47 UTC, Dukc wrote:
>> On Sunday, 20 October 2019 at 08:32:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> I find the Rationale section to be completely confusing as to:
>>> 1. what the existing state of the compiler is
>>> 2. what the proposed change is
>> What do you suggest? Mike said that it's standard procedure to put rationale 
>> first and description of the change second. How can I be more explicit?
> Yes, the Rationale section comes before the Description section. That's not what 
> he's referring to. He's asking that the current rationale be revised for 
> clarity. We can work on that when this review round is complete.

I suggest:

1. what it does now
2. what is wrong with it
3. what the proposed change is

I'd also suggest making it clear that this proposal does not affect static 
foreach. Discussion of static foreach should be removed because its length 
implies that the proposal is making changes to it, and explaining what static 
foreach does is therefore off topic for the DIP.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list