Daniel Keep wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Joel C. Salomon wrote:
Just as (1) & (2) point to a way to remove the “magic” of built-in
arrays & hash-tables, so too might (5) & (6) point to a way of replacing
the “new T(args)” syntax with something cleaner? Not that
“new!(T)(args)” looks nicer than the current syntax, but is it perhaps a
better fit with the rest of the language?
I agree. new sucks.
Andrei
Oh I don't know, I rather like being able to allocate stuff on the heap.
I mean, if I didn't, the poor heap would probably be very lonely.
Poor, poor oft-maligned heap; all because he's a bit slower than stack
allocation and needs to be cleaned up after. He's trying to help, you know!
Joking aside, what do you have in mind? Every solution I come up with
ends up being more or less the same (except with the 'new' keyword in a
different place) or worse.
I don't know. Here's what we need:
1. Create one heap object of type T with creation arguments args.
Currently: new T(args), except when T is a variable-sized array in which
case syntax is new T[arg] (only one arg allowed). It is next to
impossible to create one heap object of fixed-size array type.
2. Create one array T[] of size s and initialize its elements from a
range or generator function. Currently possible via a function that
internally uses GC calls.
3. Create one array T[] of a size s and do not initialize content.
Currently possible by calling GC functions. Probably not really needed
because it's not that safe anyway.
Andrei
