Maybe now I understand: Proc parameters are unmutable in Nim, so there is no
reason to destroy the copy. Only when inside the proc we have var myVal =
myprocPar then we get a new mutable instance, which is destroyed.
And my feeling is that = proc is never used for passing parameters to procs,
I can rewrite it this way:
O {.bycopy.} = object
i: int
proc new(o: var O) =
echo "new called"
proc `=destroy`*(s: var O) =
echo "=destroy called"
proc `=sink`*(a: var O; b: O) =
echo "=sink called"
a.i = b.i
proc
I was just thinking about how I can prevent a call of destroy from within a
proc, because for callbacks we do not want destroy calls for parameters owned
by GTK.
But it seems that this tests does not generate a destroy call for proc
parameter at all?
type
O {.bycopy.} =
