DIP 1021--Argument Ownership and Function Calls--Final Review

ag0aep6g anonymous at example.com
Mon Sep 16 11:05:21 UTC 2019

On 16.09.19 11:13, Mike Parker wrote:
> The current revision of the DIP for this review is located here:
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/1d78cdf1613911439848a49e9053a7bbf5a9de46/DIPs/DIP1021.md 

Walter hasn't changed a single thing, so the criticism from the last 
round still applies.

I'll repeat mine (and maybe elaborate on it): The DIP does not show what 
benefit it brings. In the Rationale section, it presents buggy code. In 
the Description section, it proposes a language change. But it fails to 
show how the change would help prevent the bug.

In particular, "the checks would only be enforced for @safe code", but 
the bad code in the given example calls `free` which means it can be 
@trusted at best. So it seems like the DIP wouldn't apply to its own 
motivating example.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list