On Sat, 02 May 2009 19:11:11 -0400, Rainer Deyke <rain...@eldwood.com>
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
Again, D array's are structs with reference semantics. This isn't a
pro/con either way.
The D1 dynamic array type does not have reference semantics, nor does it
have value semantics.
void f(int[] a) {
a.length = 1;
}
auto a = [];
f(a);
assert(a.length == 0);
- No long distance dependencies.
Well, if I can't copy it, then I have to use ref everywhere, which is
functionally equivalent to reference semantics. I think you've just
proved the counter-point.
Given a value type 'T', you have the guarantee that no two variables of
type 'T' can alias each other. This guarantee is preserved when the
type 'T' is non-copyable.
An argument of type 'ref T' can obviously alias a variable of type 'T'.
Okay, if T is not copyable, then I _must_ pass it as ref T, everywhere.
Which is reference semantics.
- RAII.
Can be done with structs or classes. Also see point 1. So, this isn't a
pro/con either way.
The D1 dynamic array type does not support RAII.
There are two parts to D's arrays. One a struct 2 words long, the other is
a chunk of ram. The first part is RAII, the second part is not possible,
since D doesn't allow dynamically sized memory allocation on the stack.
And basically all dynamic data structures have to do some heap allocation.
I had thought you were talking about the difference between have the
managing head be a struct of a class. (See scope classes)
