Taking a copy of an object

[Tom S]

Derek wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 14:26:08 +0100, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> 
>> Derek Parnell wrote:
>>> Currently there doesn't seem to be any standard D mechanism (read:
>>> operator) to take a copy of an object. So are there any suggestions for a
>>> name that we can all agree on; one that might become an unofficial
>>> standard? 
>>>
>>> For arrays we have the 'dup' property but for objects there is nothing that
>>> the compiler assumes. I'm partial to 'onDup' or 'onCopy', and maybe even a
>>> 'onDeepCopy' as an additional function.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>>
>>>   class Foo
>>>   {
>>>       int x;
>>>       Bar b;
>>>
>>>       this(int y) 
>>>       {
>>>            x = y;
>>>            b = new Bar(y);
>>>       }
>>>
>>>       Foo onCopy()
>>>       {
>>>           Foo t;
>>>           t = new Foo(x);
>>>           return t;
>>>        }
>>>    }
>>>
>>>    . . . 
>>>
>>>    auto backup = q.onCopy();
>>>
>> What's the "on" prefix for? I think the name should be something like:
> 
> The 'on' prefix is a *hint* to Walter that I'd really like this function to
> be invoked via a new operator and not necessariliy called directly.


Somehow, 'on' doesn't sound like an operator. On the other hand 'op' does...