digitalmars.D - Can we have strcu with destructor have postblit disabled if none is
"deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
I find myself reproducing the same pattern again and again, where I need to disable postblit on struct that have a sdestructor. It doesn't make any sense and it is error prone. If the struct is copied, then the destructor is going to run twice and free the same resource twice, which is dangerous and incorrect. Most C++ compiler warn nowadays about this. I don't think we should allow it at all in D.
Sep 05 2015
"ponce" <contact gam3sfrommars.fr> writes:
On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 22:22:03 UTC, deadalnix wrote:Can we have strcu with destructor have postblit disabled if none is provided ?I also feel like post-blit should be opt-in.
Sep 06 2015