On 3/2/18 1:21 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, March 02, 2018 11:25:00 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
Yes, I think assertions should be kept in @safe code. It's weird to have
array bounds checks kept, but not assertions (which is how you would do
equivalent bounds checks in
On Friday, March 02, 2018 11:25:00 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> Yes, I think assertions should be kept in @safe code. It's weird to have
> array bounds checks kept, but not assertions (which is how you would do
> equivalent bounds checks in a custom type).
Then just don't compi
On 3/2/18 10:26 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 02.03.2018 16:05, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 3/2/18 10:00 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 02.03.2018 15:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
In this interpetation, -noboundscheck switches DMD to a different
dialect of D. In that dialect, out-of-bounds access
On 03/02/2018 03:39 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 3/1/18 5:27 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
[...]
No, I'm looking at the source code.
At the very basic level, you have this:
assert(foo == 0);
Or whatever other condition you have. What this does is gives the
compiler leeway to ASSUME foo is 0 at
On 02.03.2018 16:05, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 3/2/18 10:00 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 02.03.2018 15:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
In this interpetation, -noboundscheck switches DMD to a different
dialect of D. In that dialect, out-of-bounds accesses (and
overlapping copies, apparently
On 02.03.2018 15:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
In this interpetation, -noboundscheck switches DMD to a different
dialect of D. In that dialect, out-of-bounds accesses (and overlapping
copies, apparently) always have UB, in both @system and @safe code.
That defeats the purpose of @safe. Whi
On 3/2/18 10:00 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 02.03.2018 15:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
In this interpetation, -noboundscheck switches DMD to a different
dialect of D. In that dialect, out-of-bounds accesses (and
overlapping copies, apparently) always have UB, in both @system and
@safe code.
On 3/1/18 5:27 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
You're looking at the behavior of the compiled executable. Then it makes
sense to say that a program compiled with the checks has defined
behavior (throwing Errors) and a program without the checks does
something undefined (because the compiler manual doesn't
On 3/2/18 3:36 AM, Daniel Kozak wrote:
I do not know, but from my experience it is good at it. I have done many
benchmarks for plenty of code, and in recent D
compilers -boundscheck=off does not improve speed. To be fair
using -boundscheck=off make D code slower in many cases, which is wierd
b
I do not know, but from my experience it is good at it. I have done many
benchmarks for plenty of code, and in recent D compilers -boundscheck=off
does not improve speed. To be fair using -boundscheck=off make D code
slower in many cases, which is wierd but true.
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Na
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 21:01:08 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Yeah, it seems like -noboundscheck should never be used.
How good is DMD at omitting redundant bounds checks? I assume not
much engineering effort has been put towards that due to
"-boundscheck=off" being available.
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 21:01:08 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Yeah, it seems like -noboundscheck should never be used.
Agreed.
It's undefined behavior if the check is disabled. How you get
the check disabled may be affected by @safe, but whether it's
UB or not has nothing to do with
On Thursday, March 01, 2018 16:01:08 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 3/1/18 3:24 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
> > On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 20:14:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> >> dmd -version=dosafe -noboundscheck -run testarrayoverlap.d => no
> >> error, undefined behavior
>
On 3/1/18 3:24 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 20:14:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
dmd -version=dosafe -noboundscheck -run testarrayoverlap.d => no
error, undefined behavior
dmd -run testarrayoverlap.d => error
@safe has nothing to do with it.
@safe has everything to d
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 20:14:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
dmd -version=dosafe -noboundscheck -run testarrayoverlap.d =>
no error, undefined behavior
dmd -run testarrayoverlap.d => error
@safe has nothing to do with it.
@safe has everything to do with. @safe guarantees that there'
On 3/1/18 3:06 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 19:05:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Yes it behaves just like array bounds. No it's not well-defined if you
disable asserts.
Right. So it's defined to throw an Error in @safe code, and it has
undefined behavior in @system co
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 19:05:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Yes it behaves just like array bounds. No it's not well-defined
if you disable asserts.
Right. So it's defined to throw an Error in @safe code, and it
has undefined behavior in @system code. The spec should say this.
On 3/1/18 12:31 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 17:06:48 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 3/1/18 11:48 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
[...]
Does that mean it has undefined behavior and should not be allowed in
@safe code?
No, it means it's a runtime error.
But then it's well-defin
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 17:06:48 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 3/1/18 11:48 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
[...]
Does that mean it has undefined behavior and should not be
allowed in @safe code?
No, it means it's a runtime error.
But then it's well-defined, like going beyond array bounds, n
On 3/1/18 11:48 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:
On 03/01/2018 04:34 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 14:54:41 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I.e. - is it well defined to copy between overlapping slices?
No: https://dlang.org/spec/arrays.html#overlapping-copying
Does that mean it has
On 03/01/2018 04:34 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 14:54:41 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I.e. - is it well defined to copy between overlapping slices?
No: https://dlang.org/spec/arrays.html#overlapping-copying
Does that mean it has undefined behavior and should not be
On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 14:54:41 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I.e. - is it well defined to copy between overlapping slices?
No: https://dlang.org/spec/arrays.html#overlapping-copying
—David
22 matches
Mail list logo
