no-arg constructor for structs (again)

deadalnix deadalnix at gmail.com
Wed Sep 19 12:40:17 PDT 2012


Le 19/09/2012 20:09, Dmitry Olshansky a écrit :
> On 19-Sep-12 15:52, monarch_dodra wrote:
>> I realize *why* the "default" constructor had to go, but "no-arg" didn't
>> have to go with it. I think it was an accident to let it go, and we
>> should be trying to fix this.
>
> I do not feel that there is a lot of reference-like types that take 0
> arguments at construction. Any meaningful examples?
>

A use case I encountered more than once is interfacing with C++.

Another is to create an argument-less initializer that forward to 
another one with default arguments.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list