On Tue, 07 May 2013 00:45:56 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
On 5/6/13 11:44 PM, Timothee Cour wrote:
It requires interprocedural analysis. This is possible for the same
functions (such as template functions) that can infer
pure/nothrow/@safe,
but it cannot be done for ordinary functions.
Can you please provide me a simple example for which the algorithm
proposed in the DIP38 will fail, and that does not involve cycles (as
described in the DIP) ?
No. That's not the problem. It may as well work.
When typechecking a function, ALL you have is:
1. the body of that function
2. the signatures of all other functions. NOT adorned with extra info,
NO bodies, NO nothing.
I think the DIP fairly clearly says that either it has the function
bodies, or the compiler-generated .di files WITH the extra info added.
-Steve
