@trusted considered harmful

[Martin Nowak]

On 07/28/2012 02:08 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>   1) Remove the distinction between @safe and @trusted at the interface
> (ABI, API) level. This implies changing the name mangling of @trusted to
> Nf, and consequently removing the distinction in DMD altogether (at
> least in user-facing parts like .stringof and error messages). In
> theory, this is a breaking change, but as any code that doesn't treat
> them the same is buggy anyway, it shouldn't be in practice. As for
> std.traits.FunctionAttribute, we could either make trusted an alias for
> safe, or just remove documentation for the former and keep it around for
> some time (there is no way to deprecate an enum member).

I haven't read through the whole thread, so pardon if that argument 
already came up.
I think you're missing an important point here.
SafeD is a subset of the language @trusted is not.
It's very reasonable to implement a compiler that supports only SafeD.
It's probably not feasible to translate @system to javascript for 
example [1].
Having the distinction at the API level makes perfectly sense for this.
It's also another use case for attribute overloading ;-) [2].

[1]: 
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/yfmgvgprfpiquakiyjlk@forum.dlang.org#post-yfmgvgprfpiquakiyjlk:40forum.dlang.org

[2]: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9511