Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix 23191 - scope parameter can be returned in @system code #14221

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 16, 2022

Conversation

dkorpel
Copy link
Contributor

@dkorpel dkorpel commented Jun 16, 2022

No description provided.

@dkorpel dkorpel added the dip1000 memory safety with scope, ref, return label Jun 16, 2022
@dlang-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your pull request and interest in making D better, @dkorpel! We are looking forward to reviewing it, and you should be hearing from a maintainer soon.
Please verify that your PR follows this checklist:

  • My PR is fully covered with tests (you can see the coverage diff by visiting the details link of the codecov check)
  • My PR is as minimal as possible (smaller, focused PRs are easier to review than big ones)
  • I have provided a detailed rationale explaining my changes
  • New or modified functions have Ddoc comments (with Params: and Returns:)

Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more information.


If you have addressed all reviews or aren't sure how to proceed, don't hesitate to ping us with a simple comment.

Bugzilla references

Auto-close Bugzilla Severity Description
23191 enhancement [dip1000] scope parameter can be returned in @System code

Testing this PR locally

If you don't have a local development environment setup, you can use Digger to test this PR:

dub run digger -- build "master + dmd#14221"

Comment on lines -19 to -21
//fail_compilation/fail_scope.d(30): Error: scope variable `da` may not be returned
//fail_compilation/fail_scope.d(32): Error: scope variable `o` may not be returned
//fail_compilation/fail_scope.d(33): Error: scope variable `dg` may not be returned
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why is this going from error to deprecation?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's commented out, likely intended as "put this in the TEST_OUTPUT once dip1000 is the default"

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, OK.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would add a fixme to clarify it

@dkorpel dkorpel marked this pull request as ready for review June 16, 2022 09:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
auto-merge dip1000 memory safety with scope, ref, return Enhancement
Projects
None yet
4 participants