named arguments, string interpolation, please stop.

[Timon Gehr]

On 1/11/24 22:06, Dennis wrote:
> On Thursday, 11 January 2024 at 20:55:52 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 1/11/24 20:33, Walter Bright wrote:
>> Maybe you want to avoid implicit GC allocations in some part of the 
>> code, but now you have to mark the entire function `@nogc` to get the 
>> checking, and then you can no longer use exceptions in that function.
>>
>> etc.
> 
> Considering the compiler doesn't use @nogc for anything that matters 
> (unlike nothrow, which changes code generation), I wonder if we could 
> degrade @nogc from a type attribute to a linting tool. It would still 
> point out accidental array literals or closures, but not complain when 
> calling a function that hasn't been proven to be @nogc.
> ...

Maybe, but sometimes you really don't want any allocations, as they 
would lead to a memory leak. The exception case in this example is 
special exactly because of its implications on control flow.

> It can still complain when calling a function that has been inferred 
> @gc,

Well, but then I can't allocate an exception again.

> and if you want to be GC free 100% certain, don't link it and the 
> linker will complain about missing symbols.

Personally, I want to use GC, perhaps just not in the innermost loop 
performing latency-critical operations behind a `GC.disable()` and not 
for the sole reason that the compiler's escape analysis was overly 
conservative.