Re: Article: Finding memory bugs in D code with AddressSanitizer

2017-12-26 Thread Johan Engelen via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Tuesday, 26 December 2017 at 22:11:18 UTC, Jon Degenhardt wrote: On Monday, 25 December 2017 at 17:03:37 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote: I've been writing this article since August, and finally found some time to finish it:

Re: Article: Finding memory bugs in D code with AddressSanitizer

2017-12-26 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
I posted this on another thread. It succinctly points out what is the fundamental difference between C++ and D on memory safety: C++: int foo(int* p) { return p[1]; } int bar(int i) { return foo(); } clang++ -c test.cpp -Wall D: @safe: int foo(int* p) { return p[1]; }

Re: Article: Finding memory bugs in D code with AddressSanitizer

2017-12-26 Thread Jon Degenhardt via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Monday, 25 December 2017 at 17:03:37 UTC, Johan Engelen wrote: I've been writing this article since August, and finally found some time to finish it: http://johanengelen.github.io/ldc/2017/12/25/LDC-and-AddressSanitizer.html "LDC comes with improved support for Address Sanitizer since the

Re: Article: Finding memory bugs in D code with AddressSanitizer

2017-12-26 Thread Mengu via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Tuesday, 26 December 2017 at 08:03:44 UTC, Temtaime wrote: The main font is very ugly. Code font looks ok tw. on the contrary, post font is very readable (might use some letter spacing), clear and beautiful. that is on a retina macbook pro. code blocks are very readable too.

Re: Article: Finding memory bugs in D code with AddressSanitizer

2017-12-26 Thread Temtaime via Digitalmars-d-announce
The main font is very ugly. Code font looks ok tw.