On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 20:57:17 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 15:11:31 UTC, Craig Black
wrote:
[...]
You want to ensure that it can never refer to GC memory. The
type system does not contain that information. It doesn't say
whether an object was
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 13:59:27 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 13:11:03 Craig Black via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I've recently tried coding in D again after some years. One
of my earlier concerns was the ability to code without the GC,
which seemed difficult
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 13:11:03 UTC, Craig Black wrote:
I've recently tried coding in D again after some years. One of
my earlier concerns was the ability to code without the GC,
which seemed difficult to pull off. To be clear, I want my
programs to be garbage collected, but I want
I've recently tried coding in D again after some years. One of
my earlier concerns was the ability to code without the GC, which
seemed difficult to pull off. To be clear, I want my programs to
be garbage collected, but I want to use the GC sparingly so that
the mark and sweep collections
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 13:32:59 UTC, Eugene Wissner
wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 13:11:03 UTC, Craig Black
wrote:
I've recently tried coding in D again after some years. One
of my earlier concerns was the ability to code without the GC,
which seemed difficult to pull off.
On Wednesday, 20 September 2017 at 02:43:44 UTC, B4s1L3 wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 13:11:03 UTC, Craig Black
wrote:
I've recently tried coding in D again after some years. One
of my earlier concerns was the ability to code without the GC,
which seemed difficult to pull off. To
On Wednesday, 20 September 2017 at 02:43:44 UTC, B4s1L3 wrote:
It's another way of doing things. It's less strict than
checking all the functions.
note: the script can be run directly by passing the file to DUB
(single file package).
Wow! Yeah that seems like almost exactly what I want.
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 14:34:10 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 14:22:21 UTC, Craig Black
wrote:
Thank you for your response. The @nogc attribute is good, but
in my opinion it is incomplete if all types still require
scanning. The purpose of not employing
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 15:15:05 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 9/19/17 10:22 AM, Craig Black wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 13:59:27 UTC, Jonathan M
Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 13:11:03 Craig Black via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
I've recently tried coding in D
