scope as template struct

[Eldar Insafutdinov]

Christian Kamm Wrote:

> Christian Kamm wrote:
> >> Unless there's a major difference to 'scope' I missed, I think that with
> >> the addition of a few generic features it should be possible to move it
> >> into a library entirely.
> 
> Robert Fraser wrote:
> > Yes this would be possible. But what's the advantage of doing it this
> > way and is it worth sacrificing syntax sugar and backwards compatibility
> > for? And would this even work right with RAII?
> 
> For the same reason that std.typecons.Rebindable isn't in the language but
> in a library: if you can build it out of other features, it's not worth
> making the language more complicated by adding it explicitly. I agree that
> there's a fine line where ease of use conflicts with orthogonality, but in
> this case not much sugar seems to be lost.
> 
> About RAII: The wrapped classes' constructor and destructor are called just
> fine at the right time. There is a bug that the destructor will probably
> segfault if construct() wasn't called, but that should be avoidable either
> by having a flag set on construction or somehow forcing construction during
> initialization.
> 
and in this case where would be class allocated? On heap? scope allocates classes on the stack afaik.