16.04.2013 13:17, deadalnix пишет:
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 07:55:51 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:
Sorry, I really don't understand what you don't understand.
Let's consider example from Issue 9603 Comment 2 [1]. Do you think
such code must not work?
Also you can look through Issue 9601 discussion.
[1] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9603#c2
[2] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9601
The code in 9603 is completely broken. It should compile and run, but
what it does is undefined as o is finalized when delegates have
reference to it.
I don't see how changing delegate into object would change anything, as
the code would be broken in the same way for the same reason.
Current behaviour when delegates stays alive when its outer scope is
destroyed is just a bad language design.
Let's assume there is a "magic" way to make code in Issue 9603 work. Do
you think this is usable?
So, the "magic": I propose to make an object on closure creation (i.e.
just prepend allocated closure with few hidden fields) and add "finalize
the closure" to outer scope dispose event. And I already described it in
Issue 9601 and its comments. What is non-obvious here?
Note: This can work just the same way if there is no GC-allocated closure.
--
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
