On 9/25/14 10:56 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 13:37:52 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
But clearly, any code that results in an immutable pointer to mutable
data without casts is incorrect. We should start by outlawing such
code, and if there are ways we can carv
On Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 13:37:52 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/25/14 9:00 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 12:46:01 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/25/14 5:47 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
I was playing around with how T.init works. And I think I
ma
On 9/25/14 9:00 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 12:46:01 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/25/14 5:47 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
I was playing around with how T.init works. And I think I may have found
a type loophole.
Given that you may initialize a pointer member
On Thursday, 25 September 2014 at 12:46:01 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/25/14 5:47 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
I was playing around with how T.init works. And I think I may
have found
a type loophole.
Given that you may initialize a pointer member to the address
to a
static global:
//
On 9/25/14 5:47 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
I was playing around with how T.init works. And I think I may have found
a type loophole.
Given that you may initialize a pointer member to the address to a
static global:
//
__gshared int a = 0;
struct S
{
int* p = &a;
}
//
Then, in theory
