On 10/8/13 4:22 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:38 PM, Walter Bright <[email protected]> wrote:
On 10/8/2013 3:02 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
You may argue that profiling won't always catch accidental allocations due to
test coverage. This is true, but then @nogc is only a partial fix to this
anyway. It will catch GC allocations, but what about accidental calls to malloc,
mmap, or maybe an accidental IO call due to some logging you forgot to remove.
GC allocations are just one class of performance problems, there are many more
and I hope we don't have to add attributes for them all.
This, of course, is the other problem with @nogc. Having a forest of attributes
on otherwise ordinary functions is awfully ugly.
And we already have a forest of attributes on otherwise ordinary functions.
It's the cost of expressiveness. Exercising deduction wherever possible
is the cure.
Andrei
