|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #16 from Dlang Bot ---
dlang/dmd pull request #13047 "Fix issue 22277 - removing strongly pure
function calls is an incorrect optimization" was merged into master:
- f5a75f5834a3ee9efa14c0e2a4da86a0c356b6df by dkorpel:
fix issue 22277 - removing str
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #15 from timon.g...@gmx.ch ---
(In reply to Ate Eskola from comment #14)
> And Andrei killed that before the draft review? What was the rationale?
I was too busy to spend a lot of time on it, especially given that Andrei was
not a huge fa
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #14 from Ate Eskola ---
And Andrei killed that before the draft review? What was the rationale?
--
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
timon.g...@gmx.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timon.g...@gmx.ch
--- Comment #13 from ti
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #12 from Ate Eskola ---
Currently, the compiler is allowed to elide such a `free` call if it can prove
that `free` has been called before with a similar value in the pointed object.
In that case, any potential crash or infinite loop would
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #11 from Dennis ---
(In reply to Ate Eskola from comment #10)
> I think the compiler is allowed to elide a `free` call implemented like
> that.
Agreed, I used a `debug` statement for demonstration purposes based on the
knowledge that the
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
Ate Eskola changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ajiesk...@gmail.com
Severity|normal
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #9 from Max Samukha ---
(In reply to João Lourenço from comment #8)
> > I am not sure this premise is true. A function returning 'void' may do no
> > work at all or do work without observable side effects. I need to think
> > more abo
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
João Lourenço changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jlourenco5...@gmail.com
--- Comment #8 from
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #7 from Max Samukha ---
(In reply to Andrei Alexandrescu from comment #5)
> >
> > Could you explain why void and pure is a contradiction?
>
> `void` implies "all of my work is done via side effects"
I am not sure this premise is true.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
Luís Ferreira changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lsferreira...@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
--- Comment #5 from Andrei Alexandrescu ---
(In reply to Max Samukha from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrei Alexandrescu from comment #3)
> > This has been discussed a number of times in the past. One proposal was that
> > `void` pure functions must
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
Max Samukha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maxsamu...@gmail.com
--- Comment #4 from Max S
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
Andrei Alexandrescu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||and...@erdani.com
--- Comment #3 from
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22277
RazvanN changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||razvan.nitu1...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Razv
---
@dkorpel created dlang/dmd pull request #13047 "Fix issue 22277 - removing
strongly pure function calls is an incorrect optimization" fixing this issue:
- fix issue 22277 - removing strongly pure function calls is an incorrect
optimization
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/13047
--
16 matches
Mail list logo
