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