www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - [RFC] Fix `object.destroy` problem

reply Denis Shelomovskij <verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> writes:
IMHO we have a huge design problem with `object.destroy`.

Please, carefully read "Now the worst thing with `object.destroy`" 
section of the pull 344 about it:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344


-- 
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
Nov 07 2012
next sibling parent Denis Shelomovskij <verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> writes:
08.11.2012 1:20, Denis Shelomovskij пишет:

 IMHO we have a huge design problem with `object.destroy`.

 Please, carefully read "Now the worst thing with `object.destroy`"
 section of the pull 344 about it:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344


Just my own post:
The first time I looked at `destroy` implementation (yes, I almost 
always read sources as documentation often gives a small part of needed 
information and in this particular case it really gives nothing) I 
considered it strange. From the second look when I completely understood 
what is it really doing I was in shock how such inconsistent and 
dangerous thing could ever be made. So finally I found time and did the 
pull. And it was obvious that everybody understand the problem or, if 
someone hasn't already read `destroy` implementation, he will see the 
diff and will agree in the moment.

But as it isn't the first time I think so, I provided a detailed 
description about [obvious] `destroy` problems. A response was about: 
"What is the problem with `destroy`? Why are you doing it?".

So here is this NG thread and, probably, I will hear even more "Why are 
you doing it?" questions which I don't know how to answer as I already 
listened all my reasons in pull description and can't add a lot. And 
probably will never understand why people asking such questions doesn't 
argue their opinion by proofing that my arguments are incorrect or 
irrelevant.

-- 
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
Nov 07 2012
prev sibling parent reply "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz> writes:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 21:20:59 -0000, Denis Shelomovskij  
<verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> wrote:


 IMHO we have a huge design problem with `object.destroy`.

 Please, carefully read "Now the worst thing with `object.destroy`"  
 section of the pull 344 about it:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344


I think you're missunderstood the purpose of "destroy" and I agree with  
the comments here:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344#issuecomment-10160177

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Nov 08 2012
parent reply Denis Shelomovskij <verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> writes:
08.11.2012 15:57, Regan Heath пишет:

 On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 21:20:59 -0000, Denis Shelomovskij
 <verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> wrote:


 IMHO we have a huge design problem with `object.destroy`.

 Please, carefully read "Now the worst thing with `object.destroy`"
 section of the pull 344 about it:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344


 I think you're missunderstood the purpose of "destroy" and I agree with
 the comments here:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344#issuecomment-10160177


 R


Thanks for the reply, but it doesn't help as I think these comments are 
incorrect.

-- 
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij
Nov 08 2012
parent "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz> writes:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 21:36:52 -0000, Denis Shelomovskij  =

<verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> wrote:


 08.11.2012 15:57, Regan Heath =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:

 On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 21:20:59 -0000, Denis Shelomovskij
 <verylonglogin.reg gmail.com> wrote:


 IMHO we have a huge design problem with `object.destroy`.

 Please, carefully read "Now the worst thing with `object.destroy`"
 section of the pull 344 about it:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344


 I think you're missunderstood the purpose of "destroy" and I agree wi=




th

 the comments here:
 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/pull/344#issuecomm=




ent-10160177

 R


 Thanks for the reply, but it doesn't help as I think these comments ar=


e  =


 incorrect.


I realise that, I'm just letting you know what I think.

It doesn't help that the comments in the pull request are not clear as t=
o  =

exactly what you think is wrong with the current behaviour.

Perhaps you could start by describing the current behaviour (try to avoi=
d  =

emotive words like 'bad' etc and just concentrate on what it does).  The=
n,  =

you could describe each change you would make and why.  It's not clear t=
o  =

me from the linked pull request just what you want to change and why.

R

-- =

Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Nov 08 2012