Robert Jacques wrote:
Sorry for the confusion of terminology. However, you talk blog about
using the 'scope' keyword to support escape analysis, ettc. i.e.
'scope' would become the 'const' of the shared-thread local-stack
storage type system. Is this still the plan?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
I'm asking about the use of scope you blogged about:
http://dobbscodetalk.com/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Escape-Analysis.html&Itemid=29
[...]
For D, we are looking at a design that creates a parameter storage class
called scope:
T foo(scope int* p);
The presence of scope means that the function will not allow the
parameter, or anything reachable through that parameter, to escape from
the scope of the function. The scope storage class can be applied to the
parameters or the 'this' reference (for member functions). Initially,
this will be a promise by the implementor of foo(), but it should be
entirely possible for the compiler to perform escape analysis using data
flow analysis techniques on the implementation of foo() to ensure it.
The caller of the function will know that a reference to a local
variable can be safely passed as a scope parameter. A million line
program can be automatically verified as being free of escaping
reference bugs.
We've talked about it, but am unsure as to whether it will work or not.
