On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 22:11:36 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 2/24/15 1:55 PM, "Marc =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7x0eiI=?=
<[email protected]>" wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 19:40:35 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
So: does DIP25 allow safe slices? Looks that way
I believe it does, but at the cost of forced reference
counting. As I
pointed out, the `ref` solution
What is the ref solution?
DIP25, in that it applies the semantics of `scope` to `ref`. The
safety gained is thereby restricted to `ref`, but does not apply
to slices, pointers and class references. That's the reason - as
you already replied to Ivan - that RCArray cannot return a real
slice.
is not applicable to slices, therefore
it needs to return an RCArray. This in turn forces an inc/dec
whenever
it is sliced or copied, and - maybe worse - it requires all
consumers to
support RCArray (or whatever other idiosyncratic RC
implementation users
come up with).
It seems to me it's time to have a UniqueArray proof of concept.
How is that related to what I wrote above?
