On Monday, 5 August 2013 at 18:29:09 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Monday, 5 August 2013 at 17:45:25 UTC, Bosak wrote:
You say that D's destroy is not like C#'s IDisposable.Then why
doesn't D then declare that kind of interface:
interface Disposable {
void dispose();
}
It _is_ similar but not exact match. 2 key differences:
1) destroy works on variety of types, not only classes
2) it puts the object into some invalid state
But you can still use class destructor instead of `dispose()`
method.
But destroy() is considered a power tool that should be used
only when absolutely needed. The very necessity to
deterministically call some method opposes the concept of
garbage collection - it is a sign of bad design and clear
indicator that one should do a proper RAII here. I really think
D approach here is much cleaner than C# one.
Well I don't know much stuff about GC and internals and if you
think it is not a good design concept, ok I'm fine with it. I
don't "miss" C#'s using statement or IDisposable. I was just
giving a suggestion that would be discussed and considered with
the community.
At least this with(declaration) syntax might make it into the
language. And probably use the more "strange" one, where you only
give it an rvalue:
with(new Foo) {
name = "Foo"; //same as temp.name
calc(); //same as temp.calc()
writeln(); //and even maybe this to be translated to
temp.writeln() and then to writeln(temp) ?
}
Well that was everything I had to say about with, using, and
dispose. I'm glad that there was a discussion going.
