What ever happened to move semantics?

[Manu]

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 at 18:01, Max Samukha via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 27 February 2024 at 07:20:46 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>
> > We do have a DIP on move semantics I wrote a while back:
> >
> > https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1040.md
> >
> > but other demands always seem to get in the way.
>
> ImportC was not a demand!
>

👆👆👆

I've been really hammering the importance of this issue for *at least* 10
years. I'm so tired of hearing myself rant, I'm just way done. I'm still as
convinced as ever that the single most important thing you or anybody could
be doing for the language, is fixing the move hole.
I'd like to be on the DIP review panel. There are several issues that stand
out to me, which I think I'll need to sleep on to digest.

@value for extern(C++) is a gigantic breaking change. Approaching it from
that angle is an interesting idea, but I wonder if it could be really
noisy. Most code passes struct/class by ref in C++; by-val structs are
fairly rare, so the idea might actually work out.

If symmetry or someone has a small budget, we should fly a small group of
key individuals into a small room, lock the doors for a few days, and just
get it done.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20240227/6fce1585/attachment.htm>