Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > On 10/29/10 21:11 CDT, bearophile wrote: > > I am toying with more ideas to strengthen D type system a bit in few spots. > > This is a minor thing, I don't know if this is a common enough situation to > > deserve compiler support, maybe not. > > > > If I want to use a C function from D code, and such C function has as > > arguments both a pointer that represents an array and int value that > > represents its length, is it possible to use a compact syntax that tells > > the compiler how to pack or unpack the contents of the fat D pointer that > > represents a D array? > > > > Something like this: > > > > extern(C) void foo(int[].ptr, int, int[].length); > > > > If the function needs two or more arrays the compiler asks you to give > > names to tell apart their parts in the signature: > > > > extern(C) void bar(int[].ptr a1, int[].length a1, int[].ptr a2, > > int[].length a2); > > > > This is supposed to avoid some bugs in using from D with dynamic arrays > > those functions foo() and bar(). > > > > So you have to call foo() like this: > > > > foo(v.ptr, n, v.length); > > > > While this generates a compile-time error because here the D code calls > > this function with parts from different arrays: > > > > foo(v1.ptr, n, v2.length); > > > > This too generates compile-time errors because m isn't the length of v1 and > > p isn't the ptr of v2: > > > > foo(v1.ptr, n, m); > > foo(p, n, v2.length); > > > > (This idea was born from reading about Deputy, a system to build safer > > Linux drivers.) I am trying to invent ideas better than this one. > > > > Bye, > > bearophile > > Other static checkers have that too. They invariably address what Walter > calls "C's biggest mistake" (and I think he's dead on to that).
Walter is dead? After trying fix C biggest mistake?
