vibe.d 0.8.0 and 0.7.31 beta releases

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Friday, 3 February 2017 at 13:21:18 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
> Keeping the system overloads would break the safety guarantees 
> at a relatively deep level and would render the whole effort 
> rather useless (this is the case for non-scope callbacks only, 
> so if you stumble over a deprecated function with a scope 
> callback, then it should be fixed).

That's kind of intended: the system would inherit safety of the 
code it calls. If the user code is not safe, there's no safety 
guarantee.

> First, it actually has helped to detect some rather subtle 
> issues in the past that have gone unnoticed for a long time 
> otherwise.

Being @safe-compatible and provide @safe guarantees are different 
issues. The latter follows from the former if user code is @safe 
and doesn't follow otherwise.

> And, maybe more importantly, annotating code as safe is the 
> only way to guarantee proper bounds checks, which is critical 
> for a server component.

-boundscheck=on should do it, ldc provides even more control how 
code is compiled.

> And finally, I feel that if nobody starts to embrace this on a 
> broader level now, it will never reach a truly mature state.

Fake @trusted annotations don't count as adoption of safety. 
Pedantically speaking @safe loses its purpose if @trusted code is 
not verified. Especially if fake @trusted becomes a habit. That's 
why safety can't be forced and is opt-in.