> On Sep 14, 2019, at 1:50 AM, Marco Pivetta <ocram...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for your reply. > lazy initialisation is already possible in userland: adding more magic to the > language for a use-case that is already implemented seems problematic to me. I think I am missing something. I was not aware I was advocating for lazy initialization, or at least not using those words to describe it. If it is problematic could you please elaborate on exactly what you mean so I can better understand your argument? Thanks in advance. -Mike
