On 2014-11-11 14:19, Tomer Filiba wrote:

> __trait(getFunctionAttributes, F) -- but it returns flags that are
> applicable only to function attributes

Hmm, yeah. Using that trait on a type might be a bit weird.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

I don't see the merit of this DIP and it clearly introduces whole new meaning of @nogc attribute (which needs a really good justification to pull it off)

On Monday, 10 November 2014 at 12:59:14 UTC, Tomer Filiba wrote:
> http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP68

To be honest, I don't think that this DIP adds significant value to the language. Generally, you (as in a language/library implementor) need to assume that *any* struct with a non-trivial destructor relies on proper finalization anyway. Let's focus work on finally fixing bug 2834 instead.

David

On Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 17:53:43 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> Let's focus work on finally fixing bug 2834 instead.

(https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2834 – "Struct Destructors are not called by the GC, but called on explicit delete". To me, this seems to be the proper fix for your problem.)

On Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 17:56:50 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 17:53:43 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
>> Let's focus work on finally fixing bug 2834 instead.
>
> (https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2834 – "Struct Destructors are not called by the GC, but called on explicit delete". To me, this seems to be the proper fix for your problem.)

I would prefer to move away from calling destructors from the GC, and introducing finalizers instead, to clean up the confusion.