If you could make any changes to D, what would they look like?

[Patrick Schluter]

On Thursday, 28 October 2021 at 15:18:54 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 October 2021 at 10:53:25 UTC, Dennis wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 27 October 2021 at 19:53:52 UTC, H. S. Teoh 
>> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> The function needs to be `nothrow` and compiled with `-O 
>> -release`, because dmd needs to account for exceptions / 
>> errors, and even then the optimization [shouldn't really be 
>> done](https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277). LDC 
>> doesn't do anything with `pure` for optimizations, but since 
>> it has cross module inlining, it doesn't need it.
>
> I think that, in addition to bugs, there is one hurdle in 
> letting the compiler to fully optimise based on `pure`: how do 
> we implement a function that manually frees an array? If the 
> signature is
> ```d
> pure nothrow @nogc void free(int[])
> ```
Not at all. free cannot, by its semantic, be pure (same for 
malloc). Trying to make free pure is a silly challenge.