Hi,

Is there a particular reason why angelscript does not support implicit constructor calls with return statements? For example the following code will typically work fine with C++ but requires an explicit constructor call with angelscript:

    class Dummy
    {
        Dummy(int i){};
    };
    Dummy testConstruct()
    {
        return 2; // error, requires Dummy(2)
    }; 

Ideally, it would be nice if the following code could work too, if you think it makes sense:

    class Dummy
    {
        Dummy(int i){};
    };

    Dummy@ testConstruct()
    {
        return 2;
    };

Note: I am still using v2.29.2 because of the JIT (I haven't had much time to try to fix it yet for v2.30),but I believe this is still the case with the new version - I apologize if it is not the case.

Implicit conversions still doesn't work in all situations. I'll look into adding support for this in an upcoming release.