Rationale for accepting DIP 1028 as is

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 5/27/20 1:49 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 5/26/2020 9:31 AM, Bruce Carneal wrote:
>> Currently a machine checked @safe function calling an unannotated 
>> extern C routine will error out during compilation. This is great as 
>> the C routine was not machine checked, and generally can not be 
>> checked.  Post 1028, IIUC, the compilation will go through without 
>> complaint.  This seems quite clear.  What am I missing?
> 
> Nothing at all.

That means safe by default is effectively loosening D's notion of safety.

This DIP must go.