No, this would not solve the issue, except you are going to drop weak ref semantics, which would reduce a signal to a simple array of delegates and greatly defeats its usefulness. (To prevent memory leaks, you would have to deregister all your objects from any signals they might be connected to, when done with an object, which is in some aspects worse and guaranteed more cumbersome than manual memory management).
Also see the following announce for the feature set of the new implementation: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected] If you want to use the new implementation, all you have to do is drop the template mixin at the beginning and use the FullSignal struct directly. A possible workaround for the bug would be to use a string mixin, but the syntax would become a bit more ugly and we would be locked up with it then, because a change would break compatibility. Any comments about the implementation are appreciated. Best regards, Robert On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 23:33 +0100, David wrote: > If you tell me that the manual memory management is an old D1 relict > and > isn't needed at all, I could clean that code up and submit a pull > request (I really learned to like std.signals).
