On 7 August 2013 18:49, William ML Leslie <[email protected]> wrote: > It could be interesting for data locality, > and also for effect based optimisations, because initialisation of > some fields of the object could be deferred if the fields are not > accessed before the copy.
Ack, I really should think before I send: I say this without a bitc-hat on. These are ideas I've played around with, but they aren't really appropriate for bitc. If you're writing a runtime for a higher-level language, these are good things to consider, as is solving small recurrence relations that allow you to determine static lifetimes if possible. deep-copy on return is a lot less magic, in fact, it could even be done explicitly with a function property. -- William Leslie Notice: Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered under copyright law. You absolutely may reproduce any part of it in accordance with the copyright law of the nation you are reading this in. Any attempt to deny you those rights would be illegal without prior contractual agreement. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
