forward: single argument, copy const

[radcapricorn]

Per discussion, augment std.functional.forward to:

• support single-argument use case
• copy immovables (i.e. const/immutable)

[wilzbach]

This LGTM as it allows use cases that didn't work before (using forward with const arguments).
However,

• as mentioned I would move the full-blown example at the end of the public examples to avoid overloading the user in the beginning
• (a bit related) I heard talks that there are plans to extend compiler support to automatically move a by-value argument if it's used only once, but it might take months or years until we see this happen...

[wilzbach]

I guess it would be nicer for the reader to have the simple example first before he has to start diving into the full-blown one.

[radcapricorn]

Will do

[radcapricorn]

Since it's been a month, I've found another use case internally, so I'm adding it now.

[wilzbach]

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into forward

Ehm you could you rebase in the future? (I can fix this one if we get a second approval)
It's rather simple:

git rebase upstream/master

[radcapricorn]

Sorry, my bad. Of course.

[wilzbach]

(I can fix this one if we get a second approval)

So I rebased and squashed to one commit and maybe we can get a second pairs?
CC @JackStouffer @quickfur

[wilzbach]

wilzbach commented 22 days ago

So I rebased and squashed to one commit and maybe we can get a second pairs?
CC @JackStouffer @quickfur

Reviewer roulette: @ZombineDev @CyberShadow @schveiguy @burner

[wilzbach]

Reviewer roulette: @ZombineDev @CyberShadow @schveiguy @burner

Okay - I am going to merge this if there's no veto in the next seven days ;-)

[MetaLang]

LGTM

[MetaLang]

Is this to avoid a template instantiation in the case where args.length == 1? If so, I wouldn't think it'd matter that much.

[dukc]

@wilzbach You forgot something here :-)

[PetarKirov]

Let's first make sure this is not a breaking change, by waiting for a green Jenkins. The last error is unrelated, but before that this run https://ci.dlang.io/blue/organizations/jenkins/dlang-org%2Fphobos/detail/PR-5348/3/pipeline looks like it might have failed because of this PR.

[schveiguy]

@wilzbach What is the status of this?

[dlang-bot]

Thanks for your pull request, @radcapricorn! We are looking forward to reviewing it, and you should be hearing from a maintainer soon.

Some tips to help speed things up:

• smaller, focused PRs are easier to review than big ones

• try not to mix up refactoring or style changes with bug fixes or feature enhancements

• provide helpful commit messages explaining the rationale behind each change

Bear in mind that large or tricky changes may require multiple rounds of review and revision.

Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more information.

Bugzilla references

Your PR doesn't reference any Bugzilla issue.

If your PR contains non-trivial changes, please reference a Bugzilla issue or create a manual changelog.

[wilzbach]

I think this just stalled due to spurious Jenkins failures. Let's see whether this still is the case...

[wilzbach]

Manually merging as this PR seems to have exhausted its status updates: