Delegate is left with a destroyed stack object

[Brian Rogoff]

On Wednesday, 30 October 2013 at 20:35:14 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:
> I think not running the destructor is the best option (although 
> to be honest, I'm not a huge fan of closures to begin with, for 
> exactly these sorts of reasons -- they only really work well in 
> a pure functional setting).

I disagree. Closures work well in Scheme (more generally, Lisps) 
and ML, which are not purely functional languages. In SICP *, the 
combination of closures and mutable state is used to model OO. I 
used closures more than I used OO in OCaml.

Things are trickier in D for a trickier of reasons. You may be 
right about not running the destructor; I'm still thinking about 
it.

-- Brian

* The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs by 
Abelson and Sussman, for those who don't know.