RFC: scope and borrowing

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 22 September 2014 at 11:20:57 UTC, Manu via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> It is a useful tool, but you can see how going to great lengths 
> to write
> this explosion of paths is a massive pain in the first place, 
> let alone
> additional overhead to comprehensively test that it works... it 
> should
> never have been a problem to start with.

Hmm... even if the code is syntactically succinct, it doesn't 
necessarily mean lower complexity or that it requires less 
testing. You provided an example yourself: you have generic code, 
which works for values, but not for references. You need a lot of 
testing not because the features have different syntax, but 
because they work differently, so code, which works for one 
thing, may not work for another.