DIP 36: Rvalue References

[deadalnix]

On Saturday, 20 April 2013 at 18:00:50 UTC, Namespace wrote:
>> The fact is, there's much more to any change than simply 
>> implementing it. Changes break unexpected things. There are 
>> always extra corner cases not considered. There are always 
>> bugs and inconsistencies.
> Could be, but I don't see what could be broken by this DIP. All 
> contingencies are listed also in the DIP (and that are not 
> many). And it passed all tests what is crucial.
>

The DIP for instance, consider that const scope ref is 
semantically equivalent to pass by value, when it isn't (and not 
only for performance reasons, but for aliasing reasons). Nothing 
is considered about it.