H. S. Teoh:
But since this is apparently not yet implemented, just what *is*
implemented currently when you specify 'pure'? Common subexpression
factorization? Hoisting? Not (yet) memoization, apparently.
Common subexpression factorization for strongly pure functions that return
integral
At the top of the module:
@safe:
later
unittest {
assertThrown(...)
}
Ooops. AssertThrown not safe.
Changing the top to:
version(Unittest) {}
else { @safe: }
makes it work, but then I'll need to use that idom in all safe modules
as assert*Thrown is handly methods.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 15:27:04 simendsjo wrote:
At the top of the module:
@safe:
later
unittest {
assertThrown(...)
}
Ooops. AssertThrown not safe.
Changing the top to:
version(Unittest) {}
else { @safe: }
makes it work, but then I'll need to use that idom in all safe
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 09:07:05AM -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
Exception itself isn't @safe yet (its constructor in particular), and
I don't think that AssertError is either. A number of stuff like that
in druntime and Phobos still needs to be marked @safe or @trusted.
[...]
Just out
On 01/17/2012 08:21 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 09:07:05AM -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
Exception itself isn't @safe yet (its constructor in particular), and
I don't think that AssertError is either. A number of stuff like that
in druntime and Phobos still needs to be
On 17.01.2012 18:07, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 15:27:04 simendsjo wrote:
At the top of the module:
@safe:
later
unittest {
assertThrown(...)
}
Ooops. AssertThrown not safe.
Changing the top to:
version(Unittest) {}
else { @safe: }
makes it work, but then I'll
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 20:26:48 simendsjo wrote:
So basically @safe is mostly a no-go as of now? Not sure I understand
what you mean though.. enforce() can be used in @safe mode.
Honestly, I suspect that that's a hole in @safe, since Exception's constructor
isn't @safe. But I don't know.
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 20:28:52 Timon Gehr wrote:
On 01/17/2012 08:21 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 09:07:05AM -0800, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
Exception itself isn't @safe yet (its constructor in particular), and
I don't think that AssertError is either. A
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 05:04:18PM -0500, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
Attribute inferrence is a big step forward in making as much as
possible @safe and pure, but there's still plenty to do there.
[...]
Funny you should mention that, I was just starting to wonder if I should
start littering
On 01/17/2012 11:31 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 14:14:36 H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 05:04:18PM -0500, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
Attribute inferrence is a big step forward in making as much as
possible @safe and pure, but there's still plenty to
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 23:40:35 Timon Gehr wrote:
I think he is interested in the state of implementation of specific
compiler _optimisations_ that make use of function purity in order to
prove their correctness. IIRC ldc has CSE for pure functions, but I
don't know exactly.
I have no
11 matches
Mail list logo
