https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2753

--- Comment #19 from Nick Treleaven <nick@geany.org> ---
> int foo(int function() ref goo);  // ref parameter

Again, that is going to be confusing with the `return ref` attribute. (And it looks weird having a parameter storage class not come first).

>> int goo(int ref function() foo);  // ref return in parameter

> Here, the 'ref' would be exactly the same as '*' for pointers and '[]' for
arrays in terms of how it is placed

It would be a simple fix to the problem, though it might make people think `ref` is a type modifier.

--

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2753

--- Comment #20 from Stewart Gordon <smjg@iname.com> ---
(In reply to Nick Treleaven from comment #19)
> > int foo(int function() ref goo);  // ref parameter
> 
> Again, that is going to be confusing with the `return ref` attribute. (And it looks weird having a parameter storage class not come first).

Is the distinction between "storage class" and "type modifier" syntactic or semantic?  I'm not sure where to find the exact definitions of these terms. dlang.org implies both in different places for "storage class", and I can't seem to find anything for "type modifier".

If syntactic, then how would 'ref' be a storage class under such a syntax? This would surely mean '*' and '[]' are already storage classes, so if that's a problem then it's already a problem for these.

If semantic, I would need to understand the definitions better to comment further.

--

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2753

--- Comment #21 from dlangBugzillaToGithub <robert.schadek@posteo.de> ---
THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB

https://github.com/dlang/dmd/issues/17505

DO NOT COMMENT HERE ANYMORE, NOBODY WILL SEE IT, THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN MOVED TO GITHUB

--