@trust is an encapsulation method, not an escape

[Zach the Mystic via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 6 February 2015 at 17:36:27 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>> I'm trying to promote suggesting '@system' blocks instead of 
>> '@trusted'. '@trusted' functions, but '@system' blocks - which 
>> can only go in @trusted functions (@system block in @system 
>> functions are redundant). It's the same semantics, but it 
>> might win the day because the intent is to isolate the @system 
>> code, while still presenting a @trusted interface, as seems so 
>> important to the leadership.
>
> That might be better than using @safe inside @trusted:
>
> @trusted void myfunc() {
> //implicitly safe
> ...
> @system { //wouldn't compile otherwise.
>    auto ptr = cast(ubyte*)4;
> }
>
> //implicitly safe again
> }

Exactly. I think this addresses the concerns. If I read Walter's 
OP correctly, it's precisely the use of the word '@trusted' that 
he opposes, unless it's built into an interface like a function 
signature. Also, a @system block could be one statement long, if 
I'm not mistaken, in which case the above could look like:

@trusted void myfunc() {
//implicitly safe
...
@system auto ptr = cast(ubyte*)4;

//implicitly safe again
}