What is the correct use of auto?

[Hans W. Uhlig]

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Robert Fraser wrote:
>> In fact, if you say "auto static x = new object()" the "auto" has a 
>> different meaning (the same meaning as "scope"). This part, of course, 
>> is inane and confusing but good for backwards compatibility.
> 
> We oughtta do Spring Cleaning in D.
> 
> If we don't watch it, soon D will become cluttered with ever so subtle 
> crap like this, that only serves as hindrance to those who try to learn 
> the language. There are many other examples of similar small things, 
> that we hardly notice, but that really make a difference in how easy and 
> fast folks can get up to confidence with the language.
> 
> And, yes, I know, whenever somebody takes them up, the answer is always 
> like, it's for backward compatibility, for the ease of C(++) guys, and 
> whatever.
> 
> It's like a single man's dwellings. A little dust here and there, and 
> underware on the armchair.
> 
> OTOH, to give Walter credit, D doesn't look anything like Perl. Bet 
> Larry has beercans in the bed.

I think I have to agree, D1 and D2 shouldnt need to be backwards 
compatible. Bad ideas or outdated ones I can fully agree need to be 
striped out