Niko Matsakis, Mozilla employee and member of the Rust core team, published a blog post on the terminology regarding mutability and uniqueness in Rust yesterday: http://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2014/05/13/focusing-on-ownership/

It's not directly related to the discussion we are currently having, and to most of us regulars their debate will appear to be somewhat trivial, as the distinction is so explicit in D and we don't have automatic borrowing. But maybe a look at a similar situation (but with different terminology) will lead to some nice ideas, so I figured I'd post this here.

Cheers,
David

On Wednesday, 14 May 2014 at 14:47:24 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> It's not directly related to the discussion we are currently having, and to most of us regulars their debate will appear to be somewhat trivial, as the distinction is so explicit in D and we don't have automatic borrowing. But maybe a look at a similar situation (but with different terminology) will lead to some nice ideas, so I figured I'd post this here.
>
> Cheers,
> David

How is it explicit in D? Something to do with shared/const? But the default-owned/borrow vs explicit unique-borrow (but `&mut`) in Rust /are/ explicit, while in D anything passed to a function is by default either a completely independent copy or a shallow copy of a reference that needs mutex'ing or a const-qualified view to be safe.

Asking, not arguing, 'cause I'm new to D and a bit confused. I hope replying to old topics is okay...