On Saturday, 1 December 2012 at 04:51:44 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday, December 01, 2012 05:42:23 deadalnix wrote:
On Saturday, 1 December 2012 at 04:32:44 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
> On 11/30/2012 3:31 PM, Mehrdad wrote:
>> If that's the case, then we need to get rid of postblits
>> entirely.
>
> The only justification I've ever been able to come up with
> for
> postblits is implementing a reference counting type.
Which have to check for null all over the place because it can
be
uninitialized.
That's only an issue with a ref-counting type which is
attempting to be non-
nullable. Most shared pointers are nullable, making such checks
be required
regardless. In most cases, I would consider this to be a
complete non-issue.
- Jonathan M Davis
The reference to the counter can be null too, not only the
payload.
