DIP53 and DIP49 (ver2) - New definitions for qualified constructors and postblits

[Kenji Hara]

I think adding new keyword/attribute just for readability is overkill.

Kenji Hara


2013/12/18 ilya-stromberg <ilya-stromberg-2009 at yandex.ru>

> On Wednesday, 18 December 2013 at 11:10:10 UTC, QAston wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 18 December 2013 at 03:42:46 UTC, Kenji Hara wrote:
>>
>>> http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP53
>>> Redesign currently implemented qualified constructor concept.
>>>
>>> http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP49
>>> Improved points from version 1:
>>> - Swap meanings of 'this(this) inout' and 'this(this) const'
>>> - Inout postblit now covers all cheap (== not rebind indirections)
>>> copies between same qualifiers
>>>
>>> Kenji Hara
>>>
>>
>> This is awesome, maybe I'll be able to use immutable in my code, thanks
>> to this and your bugfixes (opAssign)!
>>
>> One suggestion though - maybe @unique would be better than const for
>> unique postblit/constructor, I think static confusion is an important
>> lesson from the past.
>>
>
> I agree, `@unique` attribute looks more clear.
> BTW, we can use `unique` keyword for unique postblit/constructor. Also, we
> can use this keyword for unique storage class of variables and related
> issues.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20131219/8e9d5d94/attachment.html>