--- Comment #9 from Andrei Alexandrescu <> ---
(In reply to Walter Bright from comment #7)
> Yeah, my mistake. The compiler should consider @nogc when marking a pure
> function as a common subexpression.

Nononononono, @nogc has nothing to do with it. Think malloc and allocators. The
compiler should consider functions that return data with mutable indirections
weakly pure, regardless. Then they won't be subject to CSE and everything will
work well.


Reply via email to