Thread overview
Can passing an address of this to a non-copyable object be made trusted? - i.e. can I disable moving?
Aug 26, 2018
aliak
Aug 26, 2018
Nicholas Wilson
Aug 27, 2018
Jonathan M Davis
Aug 27, 2018
aliak
August 26, 2018
So if we had this:

struct A(T) {
  auto proxy() @trusted {
    return B!T(&this);
  }
}

struct B(T) {
  private A!T* source;
  private this(A!T* s) { source = s; }
  @disable this();
  @disable this(this) {}
  @disable void opAssign(B!T);
}

In order for f to be "safe" I need to ensure that B!T(&this) does not escape the scope of A!T. I figured disable construction and copying may work, but it seems you can still get it moved:

void main() @safe {
  auto f() {
    auto a = A!int();
    return a.proxy;
  }
  auto escaped = f; // escaped.source is gone...
}

Anyway around this?

Cheers,
- Ali




August 26, 2018
On Sunday, 26 August 2018 at 20:17:30 UTC, aliak wrote:
>
> So if we had this:
>
> struct A(T) {
>   auto proxy() @trusted {
>     return B!T(&this);
>   }
> }
>
> struct B(T) {
>   private A!T* source;
>   private this(A!T* s) { source = s; }
>   @disable this();
>   @disable this(this) {}
>   @disable void opAssign(B!T);
> }
>
> In order for f to be "safe" I need to ensure that B!T(&this) does not escape the scope of A!T. I figured disable construction and copying may work, but it seems you can still get it moved:
>
> void main() @safe {
>   auto f() {
>     auto a = A!int();
>     return a.proxy;
>   }
>   auto escaped = f; // escaped.source is gone...
> }
>
> Anyway around this?
>
> Cheers,
> - Ali

Not sure abut the current language but DIP1014 https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1014.md#final-review

"The point was made that allowing opPostMove to be overidden raises the question of what to do when it is annotated with @disable. The concensus was that, in such a case, an actual attempt to move the object would result in a compilation error."

So, soon™?
August 26, 2018
On Sunday, August 26, 2018 5:10:29 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson via Digitalmars-d- learn wrote:
> On Sunday, 26 August 2018 at 20:17:30 UTC, aliak wrote:
> > So if we had this:
> >
> > struct A(T) {
> >
> >   auto proxy() @trusted {
> >
> >     return B!T(&this);
> >
> >   }
> >
> > }
> >
> > struct B(T) {
> >
> >   private A!T* source;
> >   private this(A!T* s) { source = s; }
> >   @disable this();
> >   @disable this(this) {}
> >   @disable void opAssign(B!T);
> >
> > }
> >
> > In order for f to be "safe" I need to ensure that B!T(&this) does not escape the scope of A!T. I figured disable construction and copying may work, but it seems you can still get it moved:
> >
> > void main() @safe {
> >
> >   auto f() {
> >
> >     auto a = A!int();
> >     return a.proxy;
> >
> >   }
> >   auto escaped = f; // escaped.source is gone...
> >
> > }
> >
> > Anyway around this?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > - Ali
>
> Not sure abut the current language but DIP1014 https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1014.md#final-review
>
> "The point was made that allowing opPostMove to be overidden raises the question of what to do when it is annotated with @disable. The concensus was that, in such a case, an actual attempt to move the object would result in a compilation error."
>
> So, soon™?

Yeah. Hopefully, we're able to disable moving at some point in the near future. However, right now, it's definitely not possible. So, if you have a type where it won't work properly if it's ever moved, then either you need to rethink what you're doing, or you must be _very_ careful with how you use any object of that type so that you don't ever use it in a way that even might result in it being moved.

- Jonathan M Davis




August 27, 2018
On Monday, 27 August 2018 at 00:15:18 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Sunday, August 26, 2018 5:10:29 PM MDT Nicholas Wilson via
>> So, soon™?

Bah humbug. Was afraid of this :p

>
> Yeah. Hopefully, we're able to disable moving at some point in the near future. However, right now, it's definitely not possible. So, if you have a type where it won't work properly if it's ever moved, then either you need to rethink what you're doing, or you must be _very_ careful with how you use any object of that type so that you don't ever use it in a way that even might result in it being moved.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I guess I'll just stay @system for now then. Maybe I'll be able to figure something out some time.