From 6fb534eb4acd5748e41f9cc8702d7113a925f6bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: flaviut Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 14:56:27 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Updated Common Criticisms (markdown) --- Common-Criticisms.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Common-Criticisms.md b/Common-Criticisms.md index 59c9d5d..5cc7afa 100644 --- a/Common-Criticisms.md +++ b/Common-Criticisms.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ ## Nim doesn't require call-site annotation for `var` parameters This is referring to systems like C#'s: `void foo(ref int myInput){...}; foo(ref a);`. Note the ref on the `foo` call. If this was Nim, it'd be impossible to tell from the call-site that `foo` has the potential to modify `a`. -** * NOTE * ** : The following is wrong, I'll fix it soon +***NOTE*** : The following is wrong, I'll fix it soon Possibly. The problem here is that of perception. In many languages, heap allocation through pointers is the only method of having objects, and passing them to a function gives the freedom to modify them. In Nim, things can be allocated on the stack, and those things need to be treated in the same way as things on the heap.