Would the ownership model make D lang as complicated as Rust?
maxhaton at gmail.com
Tue Nov 17 18:02:00 UTC 2020
On Tuesday, 17 November 2020 at 11:34:01 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
> On Tuesday, 17 November 2020 at 10:54:20 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
>> On Monday, 16 November 2020 at 22:39:14 UTC, Piotrek wrote:
>>> And according to my (limited) academic knowledge, complete
>>> compile time automatic memory management isn't simply
>>> (You have to use hacks like weak refs and other not fancy
>> Correct and Rust itself is a proof of that.
> Rust is not proof of that. However, it is often difficult to
> prove properties of a graph that is transformed.
Rice's theorem means you can't just let the compiler do it for
you, however rust doesn't do that. What Rust shows us that a
conservative approach (i.e. annotations from the programmer and
the exact rules the borrow checker allows) is more than enough to
guarantee safety and manage memory productively.
D is already going in the right direction, the only issue really
is that (as they are now) pointers are insufficiently expressive
to be both safe and (say) act like C++ smart pointers and work
with their de/allocators automatically. Ideally we would use
structs but Rusts move by default semantics are an advantage we
More information about the Digitalmars-d