Editions Ideas

[Dukc]

On Saturday, 13 December 2025 at 04:18:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> Walter acknowledged that too many folks would consider the 
> explicit attributes it requires to be unacceptable. Now, he 
> wants to look into using full program analysis to infer them 
> instead of having an explicit scope attributes be used for it. 
> That's obviously going to have issue with cases where separate 
> compilation is required, and it's potentially going to cause 
> problems where implementation details of a library then affect 
> the code using them (though in general, it's obviously a 
> serious issue if a library which wasn't escaping a reference 
> then silently starts escaping it).

I also sometimes think dip1000 needs to be more *manual*, not 
more automatic. I see it can sure be confusing when the compiler 
says something is `scope` that you didn't designate as such. This 
happens to a local variable that's declared earlier if you assign 
it to something that needs the storage class.