# Broadcast scalar deprecation warnings

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/broadcast-scalar-deprecation-warnings/11981>\
**Category:** General Usage\
**Created:** [June 26, 2018, 9:34pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/broadcast-scalar-deprecation-warnings/11981 "2018-06-26T21:34:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rdeits](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/rdeits/32/286_2.png) [@rdeits](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/rdeits)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2018, 9:52pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/broadcast-scalar-deprecation-warnings/11981/4 "2018-06-26T21:52:20Z")

</div>

The only difference is that when you use `@.` your `Ref(x)` wrappers turn into `Ref.(x)`, which is to say they stop actually working as scalarizers (the same problem applies to my suggestion above). Tuple wrappers don’t have this problem, and I’m hoping we’ll get the `&` syntax to explicitly scalarize even in the presence of `@.`.

Unfortunately, tuple wrappers of non-bits types still allocate on v0.6, so they don’t solve the original problem.

Edit: see also [recent broadcast changes (iterate by default), scalar struct, and `@.` - #2 by rdeits](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/recent-broadcast-changes-iterate-by-default-scalar-struct-and/11178/2)

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/broadcast-scalar-deprecation-warnings/11981)._