On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:47:13 -0500, Zachary Lund <ad...@computerquip.com>
wrote:
On 01/09/2012 07:58 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:28:54 -0500, Mehrdad <wfunct...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
7. Unstable language. They're currently considering doing things like
removing "delete" as it's apparently deprecated (which will officially
make it not usable as an SP language).
Looks 100% correct. Removing 'delete' /does/ make D unusable as an SP
language... unless you ignore the GC completely, which isn't even
possible, practically speaking.
C doesn't have delete.
But removing delete isn't the problem anyways. Here is the problem
(which exists with delete present in the language):
class C
{
private int[] buf;
this() { buf = new int[5]; }
~this() {/* can't destroy buf here */}
}
void main()
{
auto c = new C;
delete c; // doesn't destroy c.buf
}
What we need is a way to hook deterministic destruction vs. GC
destruction. Only then, a SP language will you be.
-Steve
I was under the impression you could overload new and delete per
class/union/struct which gave you the ability to control how things were
allocated.
Currently, but scheduled for deprecation (to be replaced by existing
library solutions). But it's not good enough anyways. If I want to use
the GC to allocate my buffer, I still must rely on the GC to destroy it,
even if I destroy my class deterministically. Using an allocator won't
fix that.
-Steve
