On Tuesday, 18 March 2014 at 23:56:15 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:48:45 -0400, Walter Bright
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 3/18/2014 4:20 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
In a recent (well, recently pulled anyway) pull request that
Monarch Dodra
brought up, we debated what should be considered nothrow in
the depths of druntime.
There's a lot of low hanging nothrow fruit in druntime that
doesn't need analysis, it just needs to get done:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12389
Can we mark _d_monitorenter and _d_monitorexit nothrow and have
the compiler see that when using synchronized? This was the
hurdle we couldn't overcome in the referenced pull request.
Should those be marked nothrow? What about pure and @safe?
I'd be inclined to say yes. Although monitors use lazy
initialization, I think the failure to initialize a monitor
should probably be considered an Error.
