Scenario: OpenSSL in D language, pros/cons

JR via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Mon May 5 02:32:38 PDT 2014


On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
> And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack, 
> would it have been possible to write it in @safe D? I guess 
> that if not, module(s) could have been made un- at safe. Not 
> saying that a similar separation of concerns was not possible 
> in OpenSSL itself, but that D could have made it less 
> development-expensive in my opinion.

TDPL SafeD visions notwithstanding, @safe is very very limiting.

I/O is forbidden so simple Hello Worlds are right out, let alone 
advanced socket libraries.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list