Bad array indexing is considered deadly

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 01.06.2017 02:57, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
>>
>> Termination of what? How on earth do you determine that the scope of 
>> this "undefined state" is the program, not the machine, or the world?
> 
> As that is the closest scope current operating systems give us to work 
> with, this is a sane default for the runtime. Nobody stops you from 
> using a different scope if you need it.
> 

Yes, they would stop me from using a smaller scope. 'nothrow' functions 
are not guaranteed to be unwindable and the compiler infers 'nothrow' 
automatically. Also, null pointer dereferences do not even throw. (On 
Linux.)