DIP1000: Walter's proposal to resolve ambiguity of ref-return-scope parameters

[Imperatorn]

On Thursday, 25 November 2021 at 15:05:55 UTC, zjh wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 November 2021 at 14:40:09 UTC, Dennis wrote:
>
>> I don't consider that clean.
>
> I usually use `C++`,`C++` has no similar `scope`,`C++` has 
> `RAII`.
> It's like the `&` of `C++` versus the `ref` of `d`. `&` is much 
> simpler than `ref`.
> It would be nice if `d` had some `symbols/sugar syntax` to 
> simplify these attributes.

I wonder what the reason was to choose ref instead of &. Maybe 
it's kinder to the parser.