Safe mode in D?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 10/18/13 10:53 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, October 18, 2013 10:41:38 H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 01:38:12PM -0400, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> What's the reason for refusing to implement flow analysis? Maybe I'm
>> missing something obvious, but for the purposes of escape analysis,
>> isn't it enough to just have a simple one-pass flow analysis? Do we
>> really need full-scale flow analysis in order to do escape analysis?
>
> I think that it's mainly a question of complexity. Walter doesn't want to add
> that kind of complexity to the compiler - especially when that means making
> the language requires it, because that makes writing tools for the language
> harder. Given his stance on flow analysis, I'm actually kind of surprised that
> scope ever made it into the language at all.

I think one good compromise is to stick with the exact amount of flow 
control we currently have in constructors (which is primitive but quite 
adequate), and use that creatively. It's already implemented and works, 
so the implementation costs of applying it to other cases should be low.

Andrei