nogc v0.5.0 - DIP1008 works!
paolo.invernizzi at gmail.com
Mon May 27 10:12:03 UTC 2019
On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 10:01:15 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
> On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 09:07:48 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
>> On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 08:54:45 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>> On Friday, 24 May 2019 at 16:51:11 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>> Then there's the fact that if a 3rd party library really does
>>> want to corrupt memory they can just tag all their functions
>>> with @trusted, and unless someone looks at their code nobody
>>> will be the wiser.
>> ... and a @safe conscious programmer will not touch that
>> library ever with a 5 five meters pole.
>> I'm still not convinced that trusted code should accept
>> generic system code ... can you elaborate more?
> I'm not convinced either - I'm having a dialogue to figure out
> potential issues.
My nice-try to reduce the problem is: trusted code block needs to
by "manually verified" for safety by humans, so it should be
"@safe pure", aka, if you can't perform the analysis looking only
at the statements in the trusted block, that can't be marked
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce