On 24/02/11 14:47, dsimcha wrote:
On 2/22/2011 12:13 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday 21 February 2011 20:46:56 %u wrote:
Hi,
I'm just curious... why is saying something like this:
extern(C)
private static const pure override final synchronized ~this() { }
allowed?
dmd is pretty lax about attributes which don't apply. It generally
just ignores
them. Personally, I think that it should error on invalid attributes,
but for
some reason, that's not how it works. Of course, there could be other
bugs in
play here, but there's every possibility that the end result is
completely
valid.
- Jonathan M Davis
One point noone's apparently made yet: DMD's ignorance here is
occasionally a boon for generic programming. For example, in some places
in various code I write things like:
void doStuff(C)(scope C callable)
In this case, C can be either a delegate, a function pointer, or a class
or struct that overloads opCall. Scope structs and function pointers
make no sense. Scope delegates mean that the delegate does not escape
the scope of doStuff(), so no closure allocation is needed. If I had to
write two separate functions to handle cases like these it would be a
**huge** PITA.
Aren't scope parameters deprecated and going to disappear from under
your feet?
