On 4/19/2014 6:14 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Thursday, 17 April 2014 at 22:04:17 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/17/2014 1:03 PM, John Colvin wrote:
E.g. you can implement some complicated function foo that writes to a
user-provided output range and guarantee that all GC usage is in the control of
the caller and his output range.
As mentioned elsewhere here, it's easy enough to do a unit test for this.
Erm, no? You can possibly track GC calls by using custom druntime fork but you
can't track origins of such calls in source tree without compiler help.
@nogc is there to help.
The advantage of having this as language instead of documentation is the
turtles-all-the-way-down principle: if some function deep inside the call chain
under foo decides to use a GC buffer then it's a compile-time-error.
And that's how @nogc works.
And it is not good enough for practical reasons, i.e. we won't be able to use
@nogc for most of the Phobos.
The first step is to identify the parts of Phobos that unnecessarily use the GC.
@nogc will help a lot with this.
