This compiles. Is it supposed to?

@safe ubyte[] foo()
{
	ubyte[512] buf;
	auto slice = buf[0..$];
	// Escaping reference to stack memory, right?
	return slice;
}

Or is the escaping reference detection not intended to be 100%? Or something else I'm missing?

Should I file @ bugzilla?

On 10/14/16 4:49 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> This compiles. Is it supposed to?
>
> @safe ubyte[] foo()
> {
>     ubyte[512] buf;
>     auto slice = buf[0..$];
>     // Escaping reference to stack memory, right?
>     return slice;
> }

Yes, this still is a problem, but Walter has a fix in the works.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8838

This one is also fun:

ubyte[512] foo();

ubyte[] x = foo(); // compiles, but never is correct. Ever.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12625

-Steve

On Friday, October 14, 2016 16:49:44 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> This compiles. Is it supposed to?
>
> @safe ubyte[] foo()
> {
>   ubyte[512] buf;
>   auto slice = buf[0..$];
>   // Escaping reference to stack memory, right?
>   return slice;
> }
>
> Or is the escaping reference detection not intended to be 100%? Or something else I'm missing?
>
> Should I file @ bugzilla?

It's a long-standing bug:

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8838

But Walter has been working on @safety issues recently (particularly with regards to stuff like parameters escaping, because of DIP1000), so a fix should finally be coming.

- Jonathan M Davis