On 11/17/15 1:01 PM, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 at 14:29:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Thanks for the DIP, I saw it since a couple days ago.
Dynamically-verified lazy initialization is difficult, but doesn't cover:
1. Reference count updates (as you mention)
2. The reference to the allocator is essentially a mutable part of an
object that's otherwise constant.
So it seems to be DIP85 is solving a quite narrow problem, and one
that doesn't address the issue at hand.
I know, I wrote the DIP before I read this thread, and it was originally
only supposed to address lazy initialization specifically. Maybe some of
the ideas can be reused for a more general un-const concept, though.
Yes, it's a great building block for something more general. It is well
done. -- Andrei
