Scope Containers

[Atila Neves]

On Monday, 11 March 2019 at 19:40:06 UTC, bitwise wrote:
> On Monday, 11 March 2019 at 18:29:23 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>> On Monday, 11 March 2019 at 17:00:35 UTC, bitwise wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 10 March 2019 at 18:46:14 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, 10 March 2019 at 17:36:09 UTC, bitwise wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, 10 March 2019 at 16:10:10 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, 10 March 2019 at 15:12:03 UTC, bitwise wrote:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>
> <snip>

> I see now that you can iterate by returning a scoped slice of 
> the internal data store, but this could be unsafe too. If you 
> called reserve on the container, the returned slice could end 
> up dangling if a non-gc allocator was used, even if the 
> returned slice was scoped.

Unless there's a bug in my implementation or in dip1000, no, it 
can't be unsafe.

> I think that if opSlice returned a scoped range with a pointer 
> back to the original container,

It does.

> As long as the range couldn't leave the stack-frame of the 
> container, I think this would be totally safe.

It can't; that's the whole point of dip1000. Again, that's why 
this test passes:

https://github.com/atilaneves/automem/blob/e34b2b0c1510efd91064a9cbf83cbf43856c1a5c/tests/ut/vector.d#L229