-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 92
stackalloc can initialize a ROS
#1576
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
Open
BillWagner
wants to merge
1
commit into
dotnet:draft-v8
Choose a base branch
from
BillWagner:stackalloc-ros
base: draft-v8
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
I don't think this change is right.
Consider the following (SharpLab):
If ReadOnlySpan<T> has a similar implicit conversion operator from Span<T>, then that can be used for the initialization, and the type of the stackalloc expression need not be ReadOnlySpan<T> directly.
If the type of stackalloc expression could be either Span<T> or ReadOnlySpan<T>, then you'd likely need a disambiguation rule for when both types are feasible, e.g. when calling an overloaded or generic method.
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.
I think @KalleOlaviNiemitalo is correct here, it looks like
Span<T>has an implicit conversion toReadOnlySpan<T>. IfSpanis changed toReadOnlySpanin the example it fails as it requires two implicit conversions to be inserted, but use an intermediate variable and it is valid as each line only requires the insertion of one conversion:Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
The implicit conversion is required by C.3 Standard Library Types not defined in ISO/IEC 23271:
csharpstandard/standard/standard-library.md
Lines 578 to 583 in a0995e5
So I don't think any normative text for
stackallocshould be changed for this. A note could be added though.C.3 seems to be the only mention of ReadOnlySpan<> in the spec. AFAICT the semantics of the implicit conversion are unspecified and a conforming implementation could make it always return
default(ReadOnlySpan<T>). Users would be unlikely to choose such an implementation though. But any note added in thestackallocdescription should be carefully written not to claim any semantics that the standard does not actually require.