On 01-Sep-12 16:27, Peter Alexander wrote:
On Saturday, 1 September 2012 at 11:37:39 UTC, Piotr Szturmaj wrote:
It's similar behavior to nothrow and pure. Instead of manually
avoiding GC allocations, compiler does this checks for you. Imagine D
doesn't have nothrow. You'd have to check every called function to see
if it doesn't throw. In big programs throwing function may be left
unnoticed and this is why we have static nothrow checks in D.
I understand the benefit. However, there are at least two significant
costs:
1. If I want my entire program to be GC free, I have to annotate every
single function with 'nogc'. This is not something I want to do.
I'd say
@nogc:
at the top and deal is sealed.
2. It's a new language feature and has all the associated costs: initial
implementation, bug fixing, marking up of functions in Phobos,
documentation, etc.
Yes, with my approach, a rare allocation may go unnoticed, and you end
up with an undesirable GC collection sometime in the future. It's not
great, but it's not the end of the world, and I'm willing to risk that
to avoid the costs I mentioned above.
--
Olshansky Dmitry
