On 11/05/2010 02:48 PM, Gary Whatmore wrote:
Pelle Månsson Wrote:
On 11/05/2010 12:43 PM, Gary Whatmore wrote:
bearophile Wrote:
- A way to list what attributes are modified in a method (similar to my @outer).
The compiler should do this itself.
Doesn't make sense.
My reference issue:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4571
Walter, please close this as wontfix. We don't need those. These extra runtime
checks will slow down my code. I know myself when my pointer is null.
- G.W.
How, exactly, do you know when your references are null? Without
runtime checks, of course.
Good code design makes the null pointer exceptions go away. I carefully ponder
what code goes where. Simple as that. That language just introduces a boatload
of unnecessary cruft in forms of runtime null checks. I don't need to know the
exact temporal location of nulls, it's enough if the code takes care of
handling it at run time.
Say you write a library, with a class and a function. Something like this:
class C {
/* stuff */
}
void foo(C[] cs) {
foreach (c; cs) {
// do stuff with c
}
}
How do you handle null, in this case?
