On Tuesday, 21 July 2020 at 19:20:28 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
Walter gives some justification in the post immediately
following:
whelp proves my memory wrong!
On Tuesday, 21 July 2020 at 13:42:15 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 7/21/20 8:34 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
The others aren't wrong about stack size limits playing some
role, but the primary reason is that it is a weird hack for
@safe, believe it or not.
...
I don't recall exactly when
On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 22:05:35 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
1) The D Language Reference says:
"There are four kinds of arrays..." with the first example being
"type* Pointers to data" and "int* p; etc.
At the risk of sounding overly nitpicky, isn't a pointer to an
integer simply a
On Tuesday, 21 July 2020 at 13:23:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
But the array isn't initialized in the justification scenario.
It is accessed through a null pointer and the type system
thinks it is fine because it is still inside the static limit.
At run time, the cpu just sees access to
On 7/21/20 8:34 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
The others aren't wrong about stack size limits playing some role, but
the primary reason is that it is a weird hack for @safe, believe it or not.
...
I don't recall exactly when this was discussed but it came up in the
earlier days of @safe, I'm
On Tuesday, 21 July 2020 at 13:16:44 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
Either the array will hit that page during initialization or
something else during the execution.
But the array isn't initialized in the justification scenario. It
is accessed through a null pointer and the type system thinks it
is fine
On Tuesday, 21 July 2020 at 12:34:14 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
With the null `a`, the offset to the static array is just 0 +
whatever and the @safe mechanism can't trace that.
So the arbitrary limit was put in place to make it more likely
that such a situation will hit a protected page and
On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 22:05:35 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
How does that pertain to an array?
C arrays work as pointers to the first element and D can use that
style too.
2) "The total size of a static array cannot exceed 16Mb" What
limits this?
The others aren't wrong about stack size
On 7/21/20 7:10 AM, IGotD- wrote:
On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 22:05:35 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
2) "The total size of a static array cannot exceed 16Mb" What limits
this? And with modern systems of 16GB and 32GB, isn't 16Mb excessively
small? (an aside: shouldn't that be 16MB in the
On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 22:05:35 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
2) "The total size of a static array cannot exceed 16Mb" What
limits this? And with modern systems of 16GB and 32GB, isn't
16Mb excessively small? (an aside: shouldn't that be 16MB in
the reference instead of 16Mb? that is, Doesn't
On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 22:05:35 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
2) "The total size of a static array cannot exceed 16Mb" What
limits this? And with modern systems of 16GB and 32GB, isn't
16Mb excessively small? (an aside: shouldn't that be 16MB in
the reference instead of 16Mb? that is,
On 7/20/20 8:16 PM, a...@a.com wrote:
>> 3) Lastly, In the following code snippet, is arrayA and arrayB both
>> allocated on the stack?
arrayA is allocated on thread-local storage and lives as long as the
program is active. I guess a final interaction with it can be in a
'static ~this()' or a
On Monday, 20 July 2020 at 22:05:35 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
1) The D Language Reference says:
"There are four kinds of arrays..." with the first example being
"type* Pointers to data" and "int* p; etc.
At the risk of sounding overly nitpicky, isn't a pointer to an
integer simply a
13 matches
Mail list logo
