Move Constructor Syntax

[Paul Backus]

On Wednesday, 9 October 2024 at 00:46:08 UTC, zjh wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 October 2024 at 17:57:55 UTC, Anonymous wrote:
>
>
> Why not:
>
> ```d
> struct S {
>   ~this(...)
>   this(...) // existing variants
>   _copy (...) // copy constructor
>   _move (...) // move constructor
>   _blit (...) // postblit constructor
>   _future (...) // unknown now
>   copy (...)   // normal method
> }
> ```

D currently has a rule that constructors are always named `this`. 
It would be nice if we could avoid breaking that rule, since it 
would make the language more consistent and easier to learn.