https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
Mathias LANG changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan M Davis ---
(In reply to Marco Leise from comment #9)
> As long as I adhere to the three rules above, `scope` _will_ magically start
> working. Quite some people are using `in` the same way.
I know, which is why I genera
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
--- Comment #9 from Marco Leise ---
(In reply to Jonathan M Davis from comment #8)
> There has been quite a bit of debate about what it means for a reference to
> something to escape a function - e.g whether returning something as scope
> makes sense
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan M Davis ---
There has been quite a bit of debate about what it means for a reference to
something to escape a function - e.g whether returning something as scope makes
sense and counts as not escaping, because the caller c
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
--- Comment #7 from Marco Leise ---
The meaning is very clear: This reference is not going to outlive the function
scope. The compiler implementation is lacking behind on static checks, but
that's not a reason to disallow it or for the current schizop
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
Jonathan M Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com
--- Comment #6 from Jo
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
Marco Leise changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marco.le...@gmx.de
--- Comment #5 from Marco Le
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
Andrej Mitrovic changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
--- Comme
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
--- Comment #3 from wfunct...@hotmail.com 2012-07-20 00:50:30 PDT ---
That doesn't make much sense to me... I mean, I agree we need to be able to
return scoped values, but given that scope is a storage class, I don't think
applying it to a retur
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
Matthias Walter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xa...@xammy.info
--- Comment #2 from
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8121
--- Comment #1 from wfunct...@hotmail.com 2012-05-19 12:29:43 PDT ---
Also, "scope out" (and even "scope lazy") should also work, since it is
perfectly valid for both of them to say, "this parameter will not be escaped".
--
Configure issuemail
11 matches
Mail list logo