For comparison, D's @nogc attribute would be semantically similar to
noAllocations.

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 03:47, Matt Bentley via SG14 <sg14_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> As Timur suggested, using attributes would give similar guarantees.
> Although attributes are encouraged to give warnings rather than errors.
> In terms of detecting locks, I am unsure what swift's atomics
> equivalents are, but I think issuing test and/or CAS calls to atomics
> are probably good clues.
> Other people know more than me.
>
> On 7/01/2022 2:31 pm, Sophia Poirier wrote:
> > What is particularly compelling to me in this Swift proposal is making
> it a compile error, rather than a tooling issue (static analyzer or other
> build-chain analysis) as I have always seen this topic discussed. Granted,
> this also comes with some limitations when it is at the language level.
> @noAllocation is simple, though, it is very straight-forward draw a path to
> the system allocator.
> >
> > @noLocks is a more complex proposition. The fact that it can analyze
> locks that the compiler will introduce is very valuable, though, and
> something that a static analyzer that is not intertwined with the specific
> compiler cannot necessary guarantee. Beyond that, I am unsure how the
> Swift compiler is going to recognize something as a "lock". It can identify
> anything that boils down to a system primitive that is recognized as a
> lock. Recognizing a locking mechanism implemented entirely in user-space
> custom code (e.g. a simple spin-lock) is not as straight-forward. There
> also is the question of when the locking mechanism reaches down to
> scheduler wakes and yields vs when it does not. We know that in the former
> case, even a try_lock becomes an unknown-bounds operation.
> >
> > And then there are I/O operations as well.
> >
> > But... very intriguing direction to consider, I think.
> >
> > - Sophia
> >
> >
> >> On Jan 6, 2022, at 3:28 PM, Matt Bentley <mattreecebentley_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Similar to what Timur was suggesting in this talk:
> >> https://youtu.be/G3qOKiPf1WQ?t=4906
> >>
> >> On 7/01/2022 12:01 pm, Sophia Poirier via SG14 wrote:
> >>> intriguing direction:
> https://forums.swift.org/t/performance-annotations/54441
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> SG14 mailing list
> >>> SG14_at_[hidden]
> >>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg14
> _______________________________________________
> SG14 mailing list
> SG14_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg14
>