On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 01:44:07 Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 2/24/2015 1:32 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > The issue is that delete is considered @safe by the compiler, > > I thought more people would be interested in how to do a memory safe reference > counted container.
Oh, I think that that there's definitely something there and that we should be interested. I don't think that either Andrei or I were trying to take away from that. It's just that code showed a problem in that delete was considered @safe when it should be @system, so Andrei pointed that out, and then I agreed with him and pointed out that delete was really supposed to have been deprecated by now anyway. But the concept is perfectly valid, and delete can be replaced with destroy and core.memory.GC.free for the same effect without actually needing delete, so it'll still work even if delete is finally deprecated - though honestly, I would think that if you're going to be doing manual memory management, it would just be better to use malloc and free and avoid the GC altogether (though if the element type contains any references or pointers, you probably need to tell the GC about the memory so that it can scan it). - Jonathan M Davis