checkedint call removal

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 08/02/2014 06:03 PM, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> On Friday, 1 August 2014 at 18:33:34 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 8/1/2014 4:53 AM, Don wrote:
>>> I think very strongly that we should rename the "-release" switch,
>>> especially if
>>> we do start to make use of asserts. It's going to cause no end of
>>> confusion and
>>> passionate debate.
>>
>> I would expect someone who spends more time developing code with the
>> compiler to spend at least a little effort reading the two lines of
>> documentation for -release and understanding that it disables the
>> runtime assert checks.
>
> +1
>
> I've the same reasoning every time I see big threads about installers: I
> simply go with the zips for every platform I use D on.
>
> ---
> Paolo

1. Note that the information about -release given in the above post is 
misleading. The new -release assigns undefined behaviour to failing 
assertions.

2. What has this thread to do with installers vs. zips?