DIP 1025--Dynamic Arrays Only Shrink, Never Grow--Community Review Round 1
newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Mon Nov 11 22:15:37 UTC 2019
On 11/11/2019 6:22 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> This already works - and you can statically enforce it on a per-function level
> by @nogc. Or on a per-type basis with a trivial wrapper struct (except null
> doesn't implicitly construct - we should fix THAT). Or on a per-project basis
> with -betterC.
> All this proposal does is break code that hasn't opted into those existing options.
Global solutions do exist, but they don't allow mixed mode code.
The idea is to make code mechanically auditable. It isn't auditable if creating
a wrapper is expected.
>> Some communication about the overall goal here would be nice. Is there even a
> I agree with this regardless though.
Be able to mechanically verify that code does not have memory safety bugs. We
may not be able to get there 100%, but the closer the better.
More information about the Digitalmars-d