-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 610
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 23491 - Nonsensical deprecation message when using delegate #14649
Conversation
|
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 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
Testing this PR locallyIf you don't have a local development environment setup, you can use Digger to test this PR: dub run digger -- build "master + dmd#14649" |
| } | ||
| } | ||
| else | ||
| const(char)* msg = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a bit ugly to avoid run-time string concatenation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it always evaluated regardless if there's an error?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can this be easily rectified with a delegate? Its better to avoid the whole operation than do a limbo dance avoiding expensive cycles (i.e. allow the code to be simple and avoid the work entirely)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Such a delegate would then create a closure on the heap. I wish there was a standard type for error descriptions in DMD, but since we're currently stuck with printf-style statements, that's what setUnsafeDIP1000 is also based on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
God forbid a single memory allocation? It's all on the heap already, the GC really struggles with dmd code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In any case, this PR is not about reworking the signature of setUnsafePreview.
01d208f to
30a1d31
Compare
30a1d31 to
d637dfd
Compare
The error could still be more informative, but that requires more work. This removes the nonsensical parts of the error.