On Sunday 23 January 2011 06:36:27 Sean Eskapp wrote: > I get errors when working with nested functions and structs or scoped > classes, because closures can't be used with anything with scoped > destruction. This makes complete sense, but I don't even want the closure > functionality of these nested functions. Personally, I would like to be > able to opt-out of the closure functionality of nested functions: if the > enclosing function exits, and a nested function thereof is called, then a > segfault would occur when it tried to access the stack of its enclosing > function; however, access of scoped-destruction variables from an > enclosing-scope function would be fine. > > Thoughts? The not-being-able-to-access-scoped-destruction-variables thing > is really getting to me, since one of the main driving features I like > about D is the ability to use anonymous and nested functions.
If a nested function is marked as static, then it results in a function rather than a delegate. Of course, that means that you can't access the enclosing scope, but if you don't care about that, then just use static. - Jonathan M Davis
