This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 12, 2022. It is now read-only.
New destroy implementation for value types and instinsic types#2124
Closed
JinShil wants to merge 1 commit intodlang:masterfrom
JinShil:new_destroy
Closed
New destroy implementation for value types and instinsic types#2124JinShil wants to merge 1 commit intodlang:masterfrom JinShil:new_destroy
destroy implementation for value types and instinsic types#2124JinShil wants to merge 1 commit intodlang:masterfrom
JinShil:new_destroy
Conversation
Contributor
|
Thanks for your pull request, @JinShil! Bugzilla referencesYour PR doesn't reference any Bugzilla issue. If your PR contains non-trivial changes, please reference a Bugzilla issue or create a manual changelog. |
Contributor
Author
|
Closing in favor of #2126 |
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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
See discussion at #2115 for context.
This is my attempt to implement @andralex's bidding as he attempted to describe in the comments of #2115. Honestly, I don't understand his rationale and motivation for this implementation; it has a couple of special cases that seem arbitrary to me. It's also possible that I have not implemented this the way he envisioned.
But, I fear @andralex is losing his patience trying to describe what he wants and why, so I'm just going with it. Perhaps by having this implementation in front of us we can converge on understanding more quickly.
cc @schveiguy, @jmdavis