www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Anyone using nogc exceptions (-dip1008)?

reply Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:
Some time ago, Walter asked me to postpone DIP 1008, "Exceptions 
and  nogc". Subsequently, an implementation was merged behind the 
-dip1008 flag. In helping to determine how to move forward with 
the DIP, we'd like to know if anyone is actually using the 
feature and, if so, what your experience with it has been.

And a small request, if you feel the urge to say something about 
the DIP process in this thread, please start a new thread 
instead. I'd like to keep this one on topic so I don't have to 
dig for the relevant info.

Thanks!
Mar 06
next sibling parent reply Nicholas Wilson <iamthewilsonator hotmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 12:36:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Some time ago, Walter asked me to postpone DIP 1008, 
 "Exceptions and  nogc". Subsequently, an implementation was 
 merged behind the -dip1008 flag. In helping to determine how to 
 move forward with the DIP, we'd like to know if anyone is 
 actually using the feature and, if so, what your experience 
 with it has been.
No, because It doesn't work. https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19317 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19463
Mar 06
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/6/2019 4:45 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19463
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/9481
Mar 23
prev sibling next sibling parent Guillaume Piolat <first.last gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 12:36:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Some time ago, Walter asked me to postpone DIP 1008, 
 "Exceptions and  nogc". Subsequently, an implementation was 
 merged behind the -dip1008 flag. In helping to determine how to 
 move forward with the DIP, we'd like to know if anyone is 
 actually using the feature and, if so, what your experience 
 with it has been.

 And a small request, if you feel the urge to say something 
 about the DIP process in this thread, please start a new thread 
 instead. I'd like to keep this one on topic so I don't have to 
 dig for the relevant info.

 Thanks!
Haven't used it, however we could have a use for it one day as we throw manually allocated nogc exception.
Mar 06
prev sibling next sibling parent lagfra <me fragal.eu> writes:
On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 12:36:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Some time ago, Walter asked me to postpone DIP 1008, 
 "Exceptions and  nogc". Subsequently, an implementation was 
 merged behind the -dip1008 flag. In helping to determine how to 
 move forward with the DIP, we'd like to know if anyone is 
 actually using the feature and, if so, what your experience 
 with it has been.
One goal behind my work on Vibe.d and the vibe-http module is to increase nogc compatibility. Exceptions are widely used in Vibe.d and this is one of the deal-breakers against this goal. I haven't actually used nogc exceptions yet, but it would definitely help projects such as Vibe.d that are trying to give users control over memory management and allocation strategies, without having to rewrite existing exception handlers using e.g. `stdx.allocator`. As an example, the HPACK library that is currently being used in vibe's new http2 module would be fully nogc compatible if it wasn't for exceptions. See these design constraints: https://github.com/vibe-d/vibe-http/wiki If there's some interest on resuming this DIP I would be happy to start testing nogc exceptions in my modules.
Mar 06
prev sibling next sibling parent Atila Neves <atila.neves gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 12:36:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Some time ago, Walter asked me to postpone DIP 1008, 
 "Exceptions and  nogc". Subsequently, an implementation was 
 merged behind the -dip1008 flag. In helping to determine how to 
 move forward with the DIP, we'd like to know if anyone is 
 actually using the feature
Quite a bit.
 and, if so, what your experience with it has been.
Well, it doesn't work, as mentioned above. But I've come to use it anyway because I'm ok with "this code is nearly nogc, the exception (hah) being exceptions". If it worked (especially the part regarding calling destructors on caught RC exceptions) I'd've already announced this: http://code.dlang.org/packages/nogc But it doesn't, so I haven't. AFAIC all it needs are for the bugs to be fixed.
Mar 06
prev sibling parent Peter Jacobs <peterj mech.uq.edu.au> writes:
On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 at 12:36:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Some time ago, Walter asked me to postpone DIP 1008, 
 "Exceptions and  nogc". Subsequently, an implementation was 
 merged behind the -dip1008 flag. In helping to determine how to 
 move forward with the DIP, we'd like to know if anyone is 
 actually using the feature and, if so, what your experience 
 with it has been.
We use it in our compressible flow solver (http://cfcfd.mechmining.uq.edu.au/eilmer/). It is a working research code. We have lots of nogc functions in the core of our solver but really want to be able to throw exceptions. So we throw exceptions with simple messages in the optimized build and, when we want more information, we run the simulation again with a debug build of the code that constructs more informative messages in debug{} blocks.
Mar 07