DIP1028 - Rationale for accepting as is

[Johannes Loher]

Am 27.05.20 um 12:40 schrieb Walter Bright:
> 
> Indeed it is, and that's the whole point to @safe. My motivation here is
> make suspicious code stand out. @trusted code does not stand out so
> much, because it is required to exist.

By that logic, wouldn't it also make more sense to implicitly default to
@trusted instead of @safe for any unannotated D code?

Following that logic, if @safe is the default and somebody writes
non- at safe code without annotating it, it won't compile they might just
slap @trusted on it without actually checking it. By that they make it
harder for the QA department to spot.
If @trusted was the default, it would compile, there would be no
annotation on it an the QA department would see it is a red flag.

What's the difference here?