Can you find out where the code goes wrong?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Don wrote:
> Robert Fraser wrote:
>> grauzone wrote:
>>> That is, if SafeD
>>> is really meant to be more than a vaporware-joke.
>>
>> It's currently implemented in D2 using the -safe switch, AFAIK
> 
> Currently it prevents you from using inline asm, but it doesn't stop you 
>  from using pointers. So it's still 80% vapourware.

It shouldn't stop one from using pointers as long as uses can be 
checked. (Many uses are checkable.)

It's hard to find a good balance between announcing planned features 
early so as they're open for discussion and ideas, and causing 
frustration around unimplemented ideas. Probably there's some erring on 
the side of being overenthusiastic about sharing information about stuff 
well before it's been implemented.


Andrei