User defined safety?

[bearophile]

Lutger Blijdestijn:

>I wonder if anybody has brought up the idea of using or expanding the SafeD features to cover a user-defined kind of safety?<

If you want to design this idea well, then I suggest you to read some papers a bout Securty Types. You are able to find a brief overview from page 58 of this good slides pack, that is a review (from 2003) of trends in type research:

"Types and Programming Languages The Next Generation" by Benjamin C. Pierce:
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/papers/tng-lics2003-slides.pdf

Bye,
bearophile