Is the address-of operator (&) really needed?

[Sandeep Datta]

>
> 1. It's needed so that you can call it when calling C code.
>

Why can't we just use information from the C function signature 
to determine when an address needs to be passed? Why is manual 
intervention required here?

> 2. Just because ref is often better than a pointer doesn't mean 
> that it's
> never valuable to be able to pass a pointer to a variable.

Passing a pointer may be useful but IMO we should restrict such 
things to the unsafe context.

>
> 3. ref doesn't work with variadic templates very well. Take a 
> look a
> std.getopt.getopt. It takes pointers, not refs, and there isn't 
> a way to make
> it take refs.
>

Is it because getopt() is a C function? If it is see my reply to 
your point #1. I'll admit I do not know enough D to understand 
what you are saying, some explanation will be helpful.

> 4. & is useful for getting function pointers.

What does the function name represent when not used with an 
ampersand? If it doesn't represent anything then I think the 
language can be changed to yield an address directly without an 
ampersand.