> On May 21, 2016, at 01:48, Adrian Zubarev via swift-users
> <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
>
> I played around with UnsafeMutablePointer and realized one behavior:
>
> let pString = UnsafeMutablePointer<String>.alloc(1)
> pString.initialize("test")
> pString.predecessor().memory // will crash ax expected
> pString.predecessor() == pString.advancedBy(-1) // true
> pString.destroy()
> pString.dealloc(1)
> where
>
> let iInt = UnsafeMutablePointer<String>.alloc(1)
> iInt.initialize("test")
> iInt.predecessor().memory // will not crash
> iInt.predecessor() == iInt.advancedBy(-1) // true
> iInt.predecessor().memory = 42 // did I just modified some memory I don't own?
> iInt.destroy()
> iInt.dealloc(1)
> Is this intended? This is really the case where its unsafe.
>
Dmitri’s answers are all better for this specific discussion, but in general,
“unsafe” in Swift means “if you don’t follow the rules, this may crash, may
silently corrupt memory or do other bad things, may cause other code to be
optimized out or miscompiled, may be harmless”. In this particular case, it’d
be hard to check for the validity of the pointer while also being fast and
binary-compatible with C.
Jordan
_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
