DIP 1025--Dynamic Arrays Only Shrink, Never Grow--Community Review Round 1

Robert Schadek rschadek at symmetryinvestments.com
Mon Nov 11 15:11:32 UTC 2019

The Rationale of this DIP is lacking IMO.
It highlights a problem, that the DIP will fix, but doesn't 
explain the greater
context of the problem.
The last few DIPs started from a fairly low level IMO.
To me it is not clear where this journey should go.
What is the long term payoff for this pain?
Are we aiming for rust like memory management? C++ like? Python 
Something in between?

I think this needs to addressed before this DIP can be discussed.

I know this pushes the bounds of the review guidelines, but I 
think this
DIP starts a journey in the wrong direction.
IMO D's problem is not the GC nor ~=.
I think it is the "wrong to assume" that manual memory management 
(mmm) should
play nice with the GC.
The GC should be the @safe default.
If you use mmm you made your bed, don't force me to reshuffle my 
GC bed.
I think mmm and safety are very hard to consolidate.
We should spend our resources on making range based, functional, 
in combination with the GC @safe and easy.

Another valid way to solve the problem given in the rationale of 
the DIP would
be to disallow the use of malloc or the cast.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list