@safe inference fundamentally broken
Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Jun 5 11:35:58 PDT 2014
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:30:49 -0400, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr at gmx.ch> wrote:
> The fundamental issue seems to lie in methodology and it is that @safe
> is approximated by the DMD implementation from the wrong side. Instead
> of gradually banning usage of more and more constructs in @safe, the
> implementation should have started out with not allowing any constructs
> in @safe code and then should have gradually allowed more and more
> manually verified to be memory safe constructs.
I think I was one of those who argued to do it gradually. I was wrong.
When one is manually marking @safe things, it's not as bad as when the
compiler is automatically marking them. But in either case, @safe doesn't
really mean safe, so it is pretty much useless.
-Steve
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list