• CalvinP (3/9) Nov 25 2020 Any update on DOP1014 ?
• Mike Parker (2/11) Nov 26 2020 As I understand it, it's been made obsolete by copy constructors.
• CalvinP (5/7) Nov 26 2020 Then https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17448 should be
• Mike Parker (3/5) Nov 26 2020 No. The DIP was accepted. Just because it probably won't be
• CalvinP (4/6) Nov 26 2020 OK.
• Manu (7/14) Dec 04 2020 1014 is dead, just the same way as postblit is dead; it's broken by desi...

CalvinP <cloudlessapp gmail.com> writes:

https://forum.dlang.org/post/ojabjveywfhcpdnqrhof forum.dlang.org

On Friday, 19 April 2019 at 12:21:55 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 The DIP author is no longer around to shepherd the 
 implementation. It's not forgotten, however, and is one of many 
 work items that I'm keeping track of. If I'm unable to find 
 anyone with the necessary chops to implement it voluntarily, 
 then we'll eventually try to fund its implementation via the 
 new Human Resource Fund.

Any update on DOP1014 ?

Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:

On Thursday, 26 November 2020 at 05:41:21 UTC, CalvinP wrote:
 https://forum.dlang.org/post/ojabjveywfhcpdnqrhof forum.dlang.org

 On Friday, 19 April 2019 at 12:21:55 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 The DIP author is no longer around to shepherd the 
 implementation. It's not forgotten, however, and is one of 
 many work items that I'm keeping track of. If I'm unable to 
 find anyone with the necessary chops to implement it 
 voluntarily, then we'll eventually try to fund its 
 implementation via the new Human Resource Fund.

 Any update on DOP1014 ?

As I understand it, it's been made obsolete by copy constructors.

CalvinP <cloudlessapp gmail.com> writes:

On Thursday, 26 November 2020 at 12:07:23 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 As I understand it, it's been made obsolete by copy 
 constructors.

Then https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17448 should be 
closed ?

And also DIP1014 status should be updated from current 
status(Accepted).

Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:

On Friday, 27 November 2020 at 01:22:25 UTC, CalvinP wrote:

 And also DIP1014 status should be updated from current 
 status(Accepted).

No. The DIP was accepted. Just because it probably won't be 
implemented doesn't mean that changes.

CalvinP <cloudlessapp gmail.com> writes:

On Friday, 27 November 2020 at 02:57:57 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 No. The DIP was accepted. Just because it probably won't be 
 implemented doesn't mean that changes.

OK.

Any way I think some extra information about the DIP1014 future 
will be necessary.

Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 1:10 PM CalvinP via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:

 On Friday, 27 November 2020 at 02:57:57 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 No. The DIP was accepted. Just because it probably won't be
 implemented doesn't mean that changes.

 OK.

 Any way I think some extra information about the DIP1014 future
 will be necessary.

1014 is dead, just the same way as postblit is dead; it's broken by design.
Copy constructors appeared because postblit couldn't be fixed. By all the
same reasoning, postMove was broken and move constructors were being
developed as a replacement for 1014, but the person carrying the move
constructor implementation disappeared mysteriously :/