Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Justin Johansson" <n...@spam.com> wrote in message news:i42ba3$1b...@digitalmars.com...
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Justin Johansson" <n...@spam.com> wrote in message news:i424ac$27n...@digitalmars.com...
Graham St Jack wrote:
Is there any plan to introduce some way of having a mutable reference to an immutable class object on the heap? Do others see this as a problem at all?
For embedded microsystems (i.e. with ROM/RAM) this is a problem.  It
is a common use case to have a mutable reference (in RAM) to some
objects that reside in ROM.  Obviously anything in ROM is guaranteed
by hardware to be immutable.  So, yes, this is a problem in a
wider sense.
Would there every really be anything in ROM though that would be appropriate as a class though, as opposed to, say, a struct? I've never heard of an object with a vtable being stored in ROM.
Yes, well back in my embedded C++ days yes did so.  But just because I
did doesn't necessarily make it a common use case.  Strike 'common'
above and replace with 'valid.


Interesting.

Anyway, what about a mutable reference to an immutable struct (in ROM)?

Since structs are value types in D, wouldn't a reference to it (mutable or otherwise) *have* to be a pointer?




Probably you are right.  I was mainly talking in general terms about
embedded systems (ROM/RAM architectures) and with C++ experience
in this area.  I have never used D in an embedded environment so
YMMV as far as my comments are concerned.

Reply via email to