On 2/7/20 6:30 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
On 08.02.20 00:10, nullptr wrote:
```
import std;
struct SomeRange
{
int[3] val;
enum empty = false;
auto popFront() @safe {}
ref auto front() @safe
{
return val;
}
}
void main() @safe
{
SomeRange().take(10).map!((return ref x) => x[]).joiner.writeln;
}
```
I don't know how applicable this is to your use case, but this code
will compile and run under -dip1000.
That shouldn't compile. You have found a hole in DIP 1000.
----
struct SomeRange
{
int[3] val = [10, 20, 30];
ref auto front() @safe { return val; }
}
int[] f() @safe
{
SomeRange sr;
// return sr.val[]; /* error, as expected */
return sr.front[]; /* no error, but escapes reference to local */
}
void main() @safe
{
auto x = f();
import std.stdio;
writeln(x); /* Prints garbage. */
}
----
I'm too lazy right now to check if it's already in Bugzilla.
The original code is not invalid though. f is not valid, and that is a
bug, but the original code posted by nullptr should be fine by memory
safety standards.
If there is no possible way to do the original code with dip1000
attributes, then that's a bug with dip1000's design (would not be
surprised).
-Steve
