On 4/23/11 11:33 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 4/22/11 4:04 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
[snip]
This is also the reason I think it is a bad idea to deprecate D's
'delete'.
The functionality is not going away.
Andrei
Yes I realize that. It is a matter of syntax and aesthetics. Handling allocation
and deallocation non-uniformly renders the language ugly (or are you considering
to remove the 'new' keyword too?).
Allocation and deallocation are not symmetric and as such handling them
in a uniform way would be a mistake that perpetuates a poor
understanding of the underlying realities of memory allocation and
object creation. I suggest you reconsider.
And it discourages people to get informed about
custom allocators etc.
I don't see the relationship here.
I mean, how will custom allocators look like? The cost of
having the delete keyword in the language is low. Before removing that, why not
consider the 'body' keyword instead?
The cost of keeping "delete" in the language is making a rarely-used,
dangerous facility with loosely-defined semantics straight inside the
language. It reflects poor language design for many reasons.
Andrei
