Isolated by example

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 2 May 2014 at 18:32:13 UTC, Dylan Knutson wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong here, but this seems really similar to 
> how Rust does owned pointers and move semantics. Or is there a 
> large conceptual difference between the two that I'm missing?
>

There is some similarity, but Rust system has a bit more 
capabilities. These extra capability come at great increase in 
complexity, so I don't think it is worth it.

> I believe that the issues that people are bringing up with bad 
> interaction with UFCS, and losing isolated data after passing 
> it to a function, are managed in Rust with the notion of a 
> borrowed pointers. Perhaps something analogous to this could 
> accompany the `isolated` idea?

Yes, rust handle this with burrowed pointers. You can also handle 
this by :
  - Passing data back and forth (via argument, and then return it 
so the callee get it back).
  - Using a wrapper of some kind.

I don't think getting all the menagerie of Rust pointer types is 
a good thing. They certainly allows for a lot, but once again, 
come at great complexity cost. If most of it can be achieved with 
much lower complexity, that is a win.