RAII is misleading
duff via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Tue Nov 24 11:37:32 PST 2015
On Tuesday, 24 November 2015 at 19:22:46 UTC, bitwise wrote:
> On Tuesday, 24 November 2015 at 18:22:12 UTC, duff wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 24 November 2015 at 17:03:47 UTC, bitwise wrote:
>>> Then, during recursive serialization, if you found an object
>>> which was already in the table, you wouldn't serialize it
>> But this doesn't give the guarentee that the real citizen who
>> responsible to tell the client "hey i've got the ref" can do
>> it. With RC, the real owner may not know that his resource is
>> stolen by a children.
> The way that I was dealing with this at the time was requesting
> resources(files) from a shared repository by name. The
> repository would either load the file and instantiate the
> appropriate object, or return the object if it already existed.
> So, no node in the graph ever really owned a resource. All
> resources were owned by one central repository. Now, this was
> only enforced by convention, so I suppose someone could call
> delete on the shared_ptr's internal pointer, but making this
> strictly enforced through language features is difficult, if at
> all possible without major comprimises.
> There is some discussion about this idea in the dlang Study
> forum. They're trying to figure out how to implement ref
> counting in D in a totally @safe way(impossible to currupt
> memory). I think that some major comprimises will have to be
> made, and I personally wohld rather deal with this issue
> through good coding conventions.
I know that there is a study group.
And it's not the first time I post this:
because manual memory managment is the stuff.
More information about the Digitalmars-d