The "no gc" crowd

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Friday, October 11, 2013 16:27:53 ixid wrote:
> On Tuesday, 8 October 2013 at 22:37:28 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > On 10/8/2013 9:22 AM, Dicebot wrote:
> >> It is simply "@nogc" which is lacking but absolutely
> >> mandatory.
> > 
> > Adding @nogc is fairly simple. The trouble, though, is (like
> > purity) it is transitive. Every function an @nogc function
> > calls will also have to be @nogc. This will entail a great deal
> > of work updating phobos/druntime to add those annotations.
> 
> A very naive question but is there no way of analysing the
> subfunctions to check their purity or lack of GC use rather than
> having to annotate everything? D does need to be a little wary of
> becoming too heavily annotated.

Attribute inferrence can only work with templates thanks to separate 
compilation. There's no guarantee that you have the source for the functions 
that you're using (unless a function is templated). So, there's no way to do 
the inferrence in the general case.

- Jonathan M Davis