On 18/08/2018 1:29 AM, vit wrote:
On Friday, 17 August 2018 at 13:02:20 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, August 17, 2018 6:30:26 AM MDT Atila Neves via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 17 August 2018 at 11:37:54 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
> On 17/08/2018 11:33 PM, Atila Neves wrote:
>> . Good luck figuring out why your template functions aren't >>
@safe and coaxing the compiler to tell you why it's >> inferring the
attributes it is. Bonus points if it's a >> Phobos function so you
can't slap `@safe` on its definition.
>
> Sure you can. It's a template so it'll be initialized as its >
required.
>
> I've done that to fix a bug in druntime before and in my own >
libraries.
It's not easy though. You have to either be building your own phobos
or sudo editing files in /usr/include. You can, but it's a pain. Then
there's finding out exactly where in a chain of 10 template functions
that it became @system...
The reality of the matter is that you tend to have to be very
motivated to make your code @safe if you're doing much with templates
(the same with other attributes such as pure). And sadly, it can
quickly get to the point that it just feels like it's not worth it in
spite of the fact that there is definitely value to be had in using them.
I wonder what it would take to make it so that the compiler could
actually tell you where in the function call chain it first becomes
@system.
- Jonathan M Davis
Does -dip1000 affect alias template parameters and closures?
example:
import std.experimental.all;
void main()@safe @nogc{
int i = 2;
const x = iota(0, 10)
.filter!((x)scope => x == i)
.map!((x)scope => x * x)
.front;
assert(x == 4);
}
onlineapp.d(4): Error: function `D main` is @nogc yet allocates closures
with the GC
onlineapp.d(8): onlineapp.main.__lambda1 closes over variable i
at onlineapp.d(5)
No it shouldn't. You used i there which automatically requires a heap
allocation for a delegate. Hence it uses GC.
