rvalue references
Dicebot
m.strashun at gmail.com
Tue Apr 23 00:45:40 PDT 2013
On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 07:18:41 UTC, Diggory wrote:
> I'd still like someone to explain how exactly "scope ref" would
> differ from "ref" if DIP25/DIP35 were implemented.
>
> If the only difference is that "scope ref" can accept rvalues
> then why would you ever use normal "ref"? There are no extra
> restrictions needed on "scope ref" over and above normal "ref"
> under the assumption of DIP25/DIP35.
No it is not the only difference. "scope ref" (as proposed in
DIP35) is more restrictive in usage - can't take address of it,
can't return it, can't implicitly cast it to normal ref. It is
"scope" primarily and "rvalue ref solution" only secondarily.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list