Program logic bugs vs input/environmental errors

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d]

On 04/10/14 10:39, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> If someone writes non-robust software, D allows them to do that. However, I
> won't leave unchallenged attempts to pass such stuff off as robust.
>
> Nor will I accept such practices in Phobos, because, as this thread clearly
> shows, there are a lot of misunderstandings about what robust software is.
> Phobos needs to CLEARLY default towards solid, robust practice.

A practical question that occurs to me here.

Suppose that I implement, in D, a framework creating Erlang-style processes 
(i.e. properly isolated, lightweight processes within a defined runtime 
environment, with an appropriate error-handling framework that allows those 
processes to be brought down and restarted without bringing down the entire 
application).

Is there any reasonable scope for accessing Phobos directly from programs 
written to operate within that runtime, or is it going to be necessary to wrap 
all of Phobos in order to ensure that it's accessed in a safe way (e.g. to 
ensure that the conditions required of in contracts are enforced before the call 
gets to phobos, etc.)?