On 6/19/2011 8:00 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 06/19/2011 06:20 PM, dsimcha wrote:
It's ok to allow an object to replace frameInit and frameFree for
conformance to the general allocator interface, but I'd need to keep
frameInit and frameFree around. They're useful for functions that return
pointers to TempAlloc-allocated memory. I don't want to have to pass in
a RegionAllocator object to each of these because it's too verbose. I
want to be able to do:
void doStuff() {
TempAlloc.frameInit();
scope(exit) TempAlloc.frameFree();
auto arr = getArray();
}
uint[] getArray() {
return TempAlloc.newArray!(uint[])(5);
}
My other concern is that giving RegionAllocator reference semantics
would, IIUC, require an allocation to allocate a RegionAllocator. Since
TempAlloc is designed to avoid global GC locks/world stopping like the
plauge, this is obviously bad.
I was actually glad of that particular outcome...
??? What outcome?
