OK. But:

> 1. It's set up to fit into two registers on 64 bit code. This means it can be passed/returned from functions in registers. When I used this in my own code, high speed was the top priority, and this made a difference.
> 4. Having an internal reference like that would mean a postblit is required...

How exactly are you currently passing around a `ScopedBuffer` to functions (by value?) without a postblit? Won't the destructor of the passed function free the original's buffer? Seems like one big accident waiting to happen :/

> for copying/moving the range, another source of speed degradation.

Technically, if you have an internal pointer, then you are already just doomed, postblit or no postblit. There are plenty of places, both language and phobos, where objects are moved wihtout postblit. Anyways, I was thinking of relying on the array's offset, rather than "pointer to", in terms of implementation. But it could have a slightly higher cost.

Also:
```D
char[2] buf = void;
ScopeBuffer!char(buf);
```
I though implicit static array to slice was deprected. Shouldn't this be:
```D
char[2] buf = void;
ScopeBuffer!char(buf[]);
```
?