Scenario: OpenSSL in D language, pros/cons

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 5/5/14, 2:32 AM, JR wrote:
> 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.

Sounds like a library bug. Has it been submitted? -- Andrei