On 5/5/14, 3:18 AM, "Marc Schütz" <[email protected]>" wrote:
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 16:13:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 5/4/14, 4:42 AM, "Marc Schütz" <[email protected]>" wrote:
But I'm afraid your suggestion is unsafe: There also needs to be a way
to guarantee that no references to the scoped object exist when it is
destroyed.
Actually, it should be fine to call the destructor, then blast T.init
over the object, while keeping the actual memory in the GC. This
possible approach has come up a number of times, and I think it has
promise. -- Andrei
Then accesses at runtime would still appear to work, but you're actually
accessing something else than you believe you do. IMO, this is almost as
bad as silent heap corruption.
Not as bad because memory safety is preserved and the errors are
reproducible.
Such code should just be rejected at
compile-time, if at all possible.
Yah that would be best.
Andrei
