Safe mode in D?
Jonathan M Davis
jmdavisProg at gmx.com
Fri Oct 18 10:38:12 PDT 2013
On Friday, October 18, 2013 10:31:55 H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 07:25:03PM +0200, Dicebot wrote:
> > On Friday, 18 October 2013 at 17:19:17 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> > >On Friday, 18 October 2013 at 17:06:57 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > >>But if we're gonna do it, I say we should go all the way:
> > >And make scope the default parameter thingy, and implement it.
> > >
> > >God I want some kind of escaping check thing so badly, it is
> > >supposed to work already!
> >
> > Yeah it is astonishing how many holes in type system implementing
> > that single small thing can fix. I wish it never was in
> > documentation, that way I would not have bothered me that much at
> > least :)
>
> So what's the hold up? Just the lack of manpower to actually implement
> it?
The facts that escape analysis tends to be difficult and that Walter generally
refuses to do anything in the compiler which involves flow analysis would tend
to make scope very difficult to implement properly. I don't know that Walter has
any plans with regards to scope at this point or not. At the moment, it seems
to be relegated to delegates only, and even there, it's not fully implemented.
AFAIK, no plans beyond that for scope have ever been announced. It's just that
the way that it's defined in the spec implies that it would work with any
reference type.
- Jonathan M Davis
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list