A serious security bug... caused by no bounds checking.

[w0rp]

On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 17:25:26 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Steven Schveighoffer:
>
>> No, the author of the @safe code expects bounds checking, it's 
>> part of the requirements.
>
> Take a look ad Ada language. It has bounds checking and its 
> compilers have a switch to disable those checks. If you want 
> the bounds checking don't use the switch that disables the 
> bounds checking. Safety doesn't mean to have no way to work 
> around safety locks. It means have nice handy locks that are 
> active on default. In a system language total safety is an 
> illusion. Better to focus on real world safety and not a 
> illusion of theoretical safety.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

Yeah, it's like how I have matches in my house. I could use the 
matches to burn my house down, but I don't think that I will.

That is, unless I can manage to pull off a really good insurance 
fraud scam.