Re: Safe Usage of Mutable Ranges in foreach scopes
On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 11:25:26 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: Could the scope keyword be used here? Could the work done in DIP-25 be reused here, Walter? I had `scope!(const ...)` in my original proposal [1] to handle exactly this problem. The latest iteration doesn't have it as an explicit annotation anymore, but the functionality is still there in the way it interacts with `@safe` [2]. It's no longer opt-in, because it turned out that `byLine` is just a special case of a more general problem. This became clear during the discussion of RCArray/DIP25 [3]. [1] http://wiki.dlang.org/User:Schuetzm/scope#scope.21.28const_29 [2] http://wiki.dlang.org/User:Schuetzm/scope3#.40safe-ty_violations_with_borrowing [3] http://forum.dlang.org/thread/huspgmeupgobjubts...@forum.dlang.org
Re: Safe Usage of Mutable Ranges in foreach scopes
On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 11:32:50 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 11:29:53 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: Such a feature would make the usage of this pattern very (perhaps even absolutely) safe from a memory corruption point of view. An alternative non-restrictive (relaxed) possibile solution here is to change `byLine` to instead return a reference counted or GC-allocated object. Then in each iteration `ByLine.popFront()` checks if the number of references for the internally stored line is >= 2 (including its own reference). If so `ByLine.popFront()` allocates a new instance of the internally stored line and return that in the new iteration (through return-value of front()). I'm assuming this is not implemented. Is it possible to quickly query the number of references (and slices) of a GC-allocated object? Destroy, once again!
Re: Safe Usage of Mutable Ranges in foreach scopes
On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 11:29:53 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: Such a feature would make the usage of this pattern very (perhaps even absolutely) safe from a memory corruption point of view. I guess I should have posted this on digitalmars.D instead ...
Re: Safe Usage of Mutable Ranges in foreach scopes
On Friday, 8 May 2015 at 11:25:26 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote: Such a feature would make the usage of this pattern very (perhaps even absolutely) safe from a memory corruption point of view. Correction: Not exactly memory corruption point of view. Rather to avoid logical bugs when parsing/decoding line-based streams of text.
