Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Allow void return type for constructors/destructors

> > This PR should also address all of Máté's concerns since it makes > constructors and destructors always return void (even when no > explicit > void return type is specified). To be clear, my main concern was that declaring a void return type shouldn't be allowed, unless it's actually enforced. Now, it's all fine because you stated your intentions :) However, I am also fine if the void return value is only enforced when the void return type is declared. Additionally, we could emit a deprecation notice/warning when there is no return type declaration, but a value is returned. I think this would be a nice way to immediately give people the possibility to disallow a return value, while being respectful for older code bases. Regards, Máté