On Monday, 2 March 2015 at 13:30:39 UTC, Zach the Mystic wrote:
On Monday, 2 March 2015 at 08:59:11 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Monday, 2 March 2015 at 00:37:05 UTC, Zach the Mystic wrote:
I'm sure many inc/dec can still be removed.
Do you agree or disagree with what I said? I can't tell.
Yes, but I think this is overly conservative.
I'm arguing a rather liberal position: that only in a very
exceptional case do you need to protect a variable for the
duration of a function. For the most part, it's not necessary.
What am I conserving?
I let the night go over that one. Here is what I think is the
best road forward :
- triggering postblit and/or ref count bump/decrease is
prohibited on borrowed.
- Acquiring and releasing ownership does.
Now that we have this, let's get back to the exemple :
class C {
C c;
// Make ti refconted somehow, doesn't matter. Andrei's
proposal for instance.
}
void boom() {
C c = new C();
c.c = new C();
foo(c, c.c);
}
void foo(ref C c1, ref C c2) {
// Here is where things get different. c1 is borrowed, so you
can't
// do c1.c = null before acquiring c1.c beforehand. That
means the
// compiler needs to get a local copy of c1.c, bump the
refcount
// to get ownership before executing c1.c = null and decrease
// the refcount. The ownership expire when the function
returns
// so c2 is free when foo returns.
c1.c = null;
// c2 is dead.
}
The definition is a bit wonky ATM and most likely needs to be
refined, but I think this is the way forward with that issue. It
allow elision of a lot of ref increase/decrease by the compiler,
which is very important to get refcounting works fast.
