Lazy and GC Allocations

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 2/20/23 1:50 PM, Etienne wrote:
> On Monday, 20 February 2023 at 02:50:20 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> See Adam's bug report: https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23627
>>
> 
> So, according to this bug report, the implementation is allocating a 
> closure on the GC even though the spec says it shouldn't?

The opposite, the delegate doesn't force a closure, and so when the 
variable goes out of scope, memory corruption ensues.

> I've been writing some betterC and the lazy parameter was prohibited 
> because it allocates on the GC, so I'm wondering what the situation is 
> currently

It shouldn't. Now, lazy can't be `@nogc` (because that's just what the 
compiler dictates), but it won't actually *use* the GC if you don't 
allocate in the function call.

I just tested and you can use lazy parameters with betterC.

-Steve