Safety, undefined behavior, @safe, @trusted

[grauzone]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> grauzone wrote:
>> Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>>> grauzone wrote:
>>>> Frank Benoit wrote:
>>>>> safe should be the default. The unsafe part should take the extra
>>>>> typing, not the other way. Make the user prefer the safe way.
>>>>
>>>> No. D is not C#.
>>>
>>> D is an unsafe language.
>>> C# is a safe language.
>>>
>>> Like that? :)
>>
>> If you mean memory safety, then yes and will probably forever be for 
>> all practical uses (unless D gets implemented on a Java or .net like VM).
> 
> Oh how cool. So it turns out that SafeD can be 100% implemented on a 
> safe VM. It's great to give a well-defined target to potential 
> implementers.

I'm not sure. On Java you probably had trouble emulating ref 
params/returns, and on .net, you can use pointers anyway. By the way, I 
remember someone saying T[new] would be good for implementing 
arrays/slices on .net, but it got dumped (I find this funny and absurd 
in this context).

> Andrei