Is @safe still a work-in-progress?

[Chris M.]

On Saturday, 25 August 2018 at 02:37:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/23/2018 5:58 PM, Chris M. wrote:
>> Seems to be more of a warning of what issues we may face if 
>> DIP25/DIP1000 are finally implemented. It would be good to 
>> consider NLLs as well before D is committed. No point in 
>> repeating issues that have already been studied.
>
> DIP25 waqs "finally implemented" several years ago, and works 
> well. DIP1000 was implemented as well, it works, but it didn't 
> cover the case of returning through a ref parameter.
>
> There's no way to "thoroughly vet" them before implementing. It 
> doesn't happen with C++, either, somebody builds an 
> implementation and then people try it out.

What about my other point then on the syntax? I think something 
similar to what I suggested would be a much more flexible 
solution and is worth considering.