On 10/14/2012 04:54 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 10/14/2012 04:36 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> I'd have to see exactly what TDPL says to comment on that accurately
>
> Maybe I've misread it. On Page 288 it says:
>
> "An immutable value is cast in stone:
It's also possible that if a function reserves stack without
clearing it, some old values may remain in the stack which were
passed to other functions, so you'll have false pointers.
Probably a bug in GC, immutable data should be collected if not
needed.
On 2012-10-15 01:56, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
However, I believe that another option is to explicitly tell the GC not
collect a chunk of memory (glancing at core.memory, I suspect that removeRoot
is the function to use for that, but I've never done it before, so I'm not
well acquainted with the
On Monday, October 15, 2012 02:04:44 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > snip
>
> Hmm ok, this sheds some light on things.
>
> If a C function takes a const pointer and has no documentation about
> ownership then maybe it's a good guess to say it won't store that
>
On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> snip
Hmm ok, this sheds some light on things.
If a C function takes a const pointer and has no documentation about
ownership then maybe it's a good guess to say it won't store that
pointer anywhere and will only use it as a temporary?
On Monday, October 15, 2012 01:36:27 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > I'd have to see exactly what TDPL says to comment on that accurately
>
> Maybe I've misread it. On Page 288 it says:
>
> "An immutable value is cast in stone: as soon as it's been
> initialized
On 10/14/2012 04:36 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> I'd have to see exactly what TDPL says to comment on that accurately
>
> Maybe I've misread it. On Page 288 it says:
>
> "An immutable value is cast in stone: as soon as it's been
> initialized, you may as we
On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I'd have to see exactly what TDPL says to comment on that accurately
Maybe I've misread it. On Page 288 it says:
"An immutable value is cast in stone: as soon as it's been
initialized, you may as well
consider it has been burned forever into the memory stor
On Monday, October 15, 2012 00:51:34 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 10/15/12, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > Anything and everything with no references to it any
> > longer should be up for collection.
>
> I think this is fuzzy territory and it's a good opportunity to
> properly document GC behavior.
On Sunday, October 14, 2012 23:38:48 Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> toStringz takes a string (immutable(char)[]), and the GC will not
> reclaim immutable data until app exit.
If the GC never collects immutable data which has no references to it until
the app closes, then there's a serious problem. Immu
11 matches
Mail list logo
