Tell us your DIP1000 woes

[IchorDev]

On Thursday, 29 August 2024 at 21:30:31 UTC, IchorDev wrote:
> On Sunday, 25 August 2024 at 13:10:22 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>> Second, we'd like to get a number of examples of problems 
>> people have had with using DIP1000 that haven't shown up in 
>> Bugzilla. Walter wants to be as certain as he can whether such 
>> issues are fixable or if the design is fundamentally flawed.
>
> In short, my experience with DIP1000 `scope` is like if `pure` 
> was upgraded to the final boss of D; declaring ‘thou shalt 
> write a program that never returns anything!’

Just wanted to add that I do think `scope` is a fantastic and 
powerful tool for library APIs to indicate that they’re not going 
to hold on to your data, meaning you don’t have to worry about it 
being modified from outside. I think any replacement to DIP1000’s 
`scope` should provide some way to make the same guarantee about 
whether a parameter is retained or not. (And obviously it should 
be inferred by default!)