Am 10.10.2016 um 12:45 schrieb Sönke Ludwig:
Am 10.10.2016 um 12:20 schrieb Martin Nowak:
On Monday, 10 October 2016 at 09:03:53 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Of course, the new error is more restrictive than it should be, namely
if the uninitialized pointer field gets written before the first read,
it would still be safe.

That's surprising b/c void initializers for struct fields didn't use to

Hm, thanks for the hint - if that's still the case, that leads to the
very simple workaround of simply removing the "= void". Would have been
nice in theory to have real void initialization of course, plus it was
there for working around that (fixed?) issue with slow compilation times
for large static arrays, but there is probably no real reason now to
keep it.

I need to research the intent behind this to say sth. detailed, though
usually an shouldn't break working code, only deprecate it.

Okay, I stumbled over another occurrence of this:

Bugzilla 16195: delete should be @system
<- This makes it impossible to use `scope` variables in @safe scopes. The whole scope/function needs to be marked trusted now.

Bugzilla 14496: void initialization of member with indirections must not be @safe <- This makes it impossible to use std.typecons.scoped as an alternative, because it requires void initialization due to its disabled default constructor, or it would again affect the @safety of the whole surrounding scope.

I think both need to be adjusted to use a deprecation warning instead of an error. But the first one in conjunction with `scope` variables should be legal anyway, as long as the variable doesn't leave the scope (e.g. DIP1000). Maybe it makes sense to lower this to "scope (exit) () @trusted { delete var; } ();" instead of "scope (exit) delete var;" for now (making sure that the stack allocation optimization still works).

Reply via email to