On 08/17/2016 10:53 AM, Mike wrote:
> On Wednesday, 17 August 2016 at 07:17:24 UTC, Rory McGuire wrote:
>>
>>> If DIP1000 is implemented, it will change that behavior, so the
>>> allocation will instead be on the GC heap, but the compiler will do some
>>> flow-control analysis to prevent escaping references. Is that right?
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>
>> Not correct, the class would still be on the stack so we can have
>> reference semantics during assignment etc, but the instance is on the
>> stack so its faster and the function the code is inside can optionally
>> be nogc.
>>
>> DIP1000 will just make the compiler check that a stack instance does
>> not escape its scope (though it doesn't cover all cases).
>>
>> struct Astruct {} // - on stack by default
>> class Aclass {} // - on heap by default
>> void main() {
>> Astruct a = new Astruct; // override, now Astruct is on the heap
>> (because of "new")
>> Aclass c = new Aclass; // on the heap as per-usual
>> scope Aclass c1 = new Aclass; // override, now class is on the stack
>> (most obvious use: to make all references use the same instance)
>> }
>
> Got it! Thank you! But it still appears that what's illustrated on the
> deprecations page is not being deprecated.
>
> MikeYes, it will have to be updated - but I didn't want to adjust it before DIP1000 spec is finalized. Rationale that was driving deprecation of scope storage class is becoming obsolete with DIP1000 implemented but not before.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
