checkedint call removal

[Artur Skawina via Digitalmars-d]

On 08/02/14 14:12, Tobias Pankrath via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Saturday, 2 August 2014 at 11:12:42 UTC, Artur Skawina via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>
>> _`assume` is extremely dangerous_.
> 
> You sure can come up with an example where -release (and only with release the problem exists) results in equally dangerous behaviour by overwriting memory due to disabled bound checks.

`assume` (ie Walter's version of assert) is much worse because even
if there are uncoditionally-enabled open-coded bounds checks, the
compiler will silently skip them.

This:

------------------------------------------------------------------
   auto fx(ubyte* p, size_t len) @safe {
      assert_(len>0);
      if (len>=1)
         return p[0];
      return -1;
   }
------------------------------------------------------------------

turns into:

------------------------------------------------------------------
00000000004029a0 <@safe int fx(ubyte*, ulong)>:
  4029a0:       0f b6 07                movzbl (%rdi),%eax
  4029a3:       c3                      retq   
------------------------------------------------------------------

Keep in mind that the `assert` can be elsewhere, in a different
function and/or module, and can even be written in a different
language. The D-asserts will propagate into C code, just like in
my previous example.

artur