March 23, 2019 Re: DIP1000 finds stack corruption bug in std.socket | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bitwise | On Saturday, 23 March 2019 at 16:32:00 UTC, bitwise wrote: > It's disappointing to hear the current plans for scope are so limited. I originally thought that scope would be a general type qualifier which restricted anything it was applied to from being copied out of it's current scope. > > I was hoping to be able to apply scope to range objects returned from containers so they couldn't leave the scope of where they were retrieved. I also saw that Atila used scope on a postblit, which also seems like something that should keep the range from leaving the scope where it was retrieved. If I understand correctly though, neither of these uses is officially supported or planned right now - is that correct? > > Thanks, > Bit I also had this misconception initially because that's how scope was originally defined to work; hence this thread: https://forum.dlang.org/thread/zayyoiupftrvbummxabk@forum.dlang.org |
March 25, 2019 Re: DIP1000 finds stack corruption bug in std.socket | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Meta | On Saturday, 23 March 2019 at 19:58:34 UTC, Meta wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 March 2019 at 16:32:00 UTC, bitwise wrote:
>> [...]
>
> I also had this misconception initially because that's how scope was originally defined to work; hence this thread: https://forum.dlang.org/thread/zayyoiupftrvbummxabk@forum.dlang.org
It makes no sense to have one keyword that overlaps two others, especially when there's such a strong bias against adding new keywords.
|
March 25, 2019 Re: DIP1000 finds stack corruption bug in std.socket | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Meta | On Saturday, 23 March 2019 at 19:58:34 UTC, Meta wrote:
> [...]
That was a serious question about "in".
(this point was supposed to precede the last comment, but was eaten by the forum)
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation