Maybe D is right about GC after all !

[Paolo Invernizzi]

On Tuesday, 26 December 2017 at 09:21:20 UTC, codephantom wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 December 2017 at 09:03:31 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi 
> wrote:
>>
>> The point is that the presence of one @safe: line in the 
>> module can be mechanically checked, over one million devs 
>> working on a codebase.
>>
>> The whole point of Walter argumentation is 'mechanically'.
>>
>> /Paolo
>
> My C/C++ code can be 'mechanically' checked too.. and those 
> checks are better than they've even been, and getting better.

IMHO, the lost list of vulnerability in code shipped by "first 
class enterprises" is just crying out that C/C++ is not 
mechanically checkable.
And we are talking about company that can literally spend an 
Everest of money on that.

/Paolo