On Sunday, 20 September 2015 at 18:52:17 UTC, Lambert Duijst
wrote:
Just want to know if D protects against dangling pointers or is
this just something you should never do.
The answer is both: it tries to protect you but you still
shouldn't do it.
If we are not supposed to use Object.destroy anymore then how
can we still free non-memory resources that are held by classes
(which are typically cg'ed) in a deterministic way ?
The function btw is actually destroy(Object). It works as
Object.destroy because of the uniform function call syntax
feature which will rewrite it. But I recommend doing
destroy(Object) because then you get consistent results, even if
an interface has its own destroy method.
But you can use it, destroy is cool. delete was teh problem
because it doesn't provide even the minimal protection the
destroy function has.
(You can also malloc/free or stack allocate if you really want to
take matters into your own hands but then the language basically
doesn't help you at all in the dangling pointer problem.)
