On Wednesday, 27 March 2013 at 09:10:35 UTC, Minas Mina wrote:
> auto in?
> in ref?

in ref was suggested by Kenji and rejected by Jonathan.
What should auto in mean? auto const scope?

I have to say that I like ref&, it's the best of two worlds. :)
We need a clear statement so someone can finally begin.

So I changed it into 'ref&'.

Quick example:

[code]
void bar1(ref& A a) { } // OK
void bar2(ref &A a) { } // OK
void bar21(&A a) { } // Error: '&' can only be used in combination with 'ref'.
void bar22(& A a) { } // Error: '&' can only be used in combination with 'ref'.
void bar3(ref const& A a) { } // OK
void bar4(ref const &A a) { } // OK
void bar5(ref &const A a) { } // Error: '&' Must be directly used in front of the type.
void bar6(ref& const A a) { } // Error: '&' Must be directly used in front of the type.
[/code]

Thoughts?

I'm surprised that this is ignored and no one seems to be interested in a possible solution.
Is it me? Or are my efforts a complete mischief?

Ok I interpret this as a rejection of the idea.

On 29.3.2013 11:59, Namespace wrote:
> Ok I interpret this as a rejection of the idea.

This seems like a language design decision and as such would get much broader audience (and probably more responses) in digitalmars.D than in learn forum. Threads in here can get overlooked easily.

Maybe you should try some cross-posting...

Martin

On Friday, 29 March 2013 at 12:57:55 UTC, Martin Drasar wrote:
> On 29.3.2013 11:59, Namespace wrote:
>> Ok I interpret this as a rejection of the idea.
>
> This seems like a language design decision and as such would get much
> broader audience (and probably more responses) in digitalmars.D than in
> learn forum. Threads in here can get overlooked easily.
>
> Maybe you should try some cross-posting...
>
> Martin

Good I will try it.