Rationale for accepting DIP 1028 as is
jmh530
john.michael.hall at gmail.com
Fri May 29 12:43:53 UTC 2020
On Friday, 29 May 2020 at 11:33:01 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 16:01:35 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> This would be another round of massively breaking user code.
>
> The breakage will be split in two rounds, but the amount of
> code needed to be modified would be the same as with the
> safe-by-default-except-for-extern-non-c. With the possibility
> of not needing the second round.
>
> I know, arguing for a lost cause...
At the end of the day, I think people would accept "massively
breaking user code" if there is a good justification and doesn't
drive a hole through @safe.
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list