On 12/11/2014 11:55 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Friday, 12 December 2014 at 07:48:21 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I don't see how this is related. It would be perfectly ok to declare root of
such tree scope if it was transitive (as long as it only controls access and
does not attempt early destruction).
Are you suggesting two kinds of scope - transitive and non-transitive?
The more I think about it, the more ref counting is the definitive case, as
just about everything else can be explained in terms of how ref counting works.
I don't see applicability of non-transitive scope because I don't understand the
problem with the tree or reference counting you have mentioned - that is why I
suggested to amend DIP to put explanation there.
Consider every pointer in a tree to be a ref counted pointer. There is no
purpose to making scope transitive - traveling from one node to the next goes
through the usual ref counting mechanism, and the ref counting wrapper can
control that.
Also, consider a data structure:
A -> B
C -> B
If scope is transitive, how is C going to simultaneously access B?
