Re: opApply @safety
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 23:35:35 +, Basile B. wrote: > You can implement an input range and annotate all the primitives as > @safe. I hadn't realized that if front() returns a tuple, it's automatically expanded. Works for me.
Re: opApply @safety
On Friday, 29 January 2016 at 17:44:34 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
I want to create an opApply for a type.
I've marked my code @safe, because everything I wrote was
@safe. The body of opApply is @safe, but it calls a delegate
that may or may not be @safe.
How do I make it so I can iterate through this type safely and
systemly?
I want to support iteration like:
foreach (string key, string value; collection) {}
foreach (size_t i, string key, string value; collection) {}
You can implement an input range and annotate all the primitives
as @safe.
Then if there's only an input range in your agregate, DMD will
auto-detect that it must use it in foreach():
http://dlang.org/spec/statement.html#foreach-with-ranges
in the worst case (range not implementable directly but only as a
getter in .range() or .opSlice() you'll have to change the style
a bit and consume the range explicitly in a typical "while
(!stuff.empty) {...}"
Re: opApply @safety
On 1/29/16 3:08 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:00:08 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 1/29/16 12:44 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
I want to create an opApply for a type.
I've marked my code @safe, because everything I wrote was @safe. The
body of opApply is @safe, but it calls a delegate that may or may not
be @safe.
How do I make it so I can iterate through this type safely and
systemly?
Likely an overload. Tag the delegate as being @safe or not.
-Steve
That's handy. It works. I can make it so someone can call:
foo.opApply((i, k, v) @safe => 0);
foo.opApply((i, k, v) @system => 0);
And that works.
However, if you have:
@safe void bar() {
foreach(i, k, v; foo) {
}
}
the compiler complains:
opapplysafe.d(12): Error: foo.opApply matches more than one declaration:
opapplysafe.d(2): @safe int(int delegate(int, string, string) @safe
dg)
and:
opapplysafe.d(5): @system int(int delegate(int, string, string)
@system dg)
Guess I'll file a bug.
Definitely seems like a bug.
As a workaround, you can name the opApply functions:
struct S
{
int opApply(int delegate(int, string, string) @safe dg) @safe {...}
int unsafeApply(int delegate(int, string, string) dg) {...}
}
foreach(i, k, v; foo.unsafeApply) {...}
though that's... ugly.
-Steve
Re: opApply @safety
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:00:08 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 1/29/16 12:44 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
>> I want to create an opApply for a type.
>>
>> I've marked my code @safe, because everything I wrote was @safe. The
>> body of opApply is @safe, but it calls a delegate that may or may not
>> be @safe.
>>
>> How do I make it so I can iterate through this type safely and
>> systemly?
>
> Likely an overload. Tag the delegate as being @safe or not.
>
> -Steve
That's handy. It works. I can make it so someone can call:
foo.opApply((i, k, v) @safe => 0);
foo.opApply((i, k, v) @system => 0);
And that works.
However, if you have:
@safe void bar() {
foreach(i, k, v; foo) {
}
}
the compiler complains:
opapplysafe.d(12): Error: foo.opApply matches more than one declaration:
opapplysafe.d(2): @safe int(int delegate(int, string, string) @safe
dg)
and:
opapplysafe.d(5): @system int(int delegate(int, string, string)
@system dg)
Guess I'll file a bug.
Re: opApply @safety
On 1/29/16 12:44 PM, Chris Wright wrote: I want to create an opApply for a type. I've marked my code @safe, because everything I wrote was @safe. The body of opApply is @safe, but it calls a delegate that may or may not be @safe. How do I make it so I can iterate through this type safely and systemly? Likely an overload. Tag the delegate as being @safe or not. -Steve
