Dlist and dip1000 challenge

[Walter Bright]

On 10/23/2018 8:10 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> So, here is one other thing I want to say. This took me HOURS to find, and 
> narrow down. Not because I don't understand the concepts behind dip1000, but 
> because the compiler has fully inserted so many hidden scopes, I don't know what 
> the actual code it's compiling is. One big problem I think with dip1000 is 
> simply that it's nearly impossible to understand where the issues are. Like I 
> said at the end of the post above, the result of allowing compiler inference of 
> dip1000 is that your whole program is simply marked unsafe, and you have 
> absolutely no idea where it is. You can't even guess, because scope just shows 
> up where you never typed it. Given that you NEED this functionality on 
> templates, it's going to result, IMO, in people either not using dip1000, or 
> giving up and adding @trusted: to the top of their file. This is going to be 
> horrible if we can't find a way to either require scope instead of inferring it 
> in some cases, or create a way to diagnose where the blasted problem actually 
> is. Maybe something to say "I expected this call to be @safe, why isn't it".

My improvements to DIP1000 are completely dead in the water due to lack of 
interest. It's impossible to make Phobos DIP1000 compatible if nobody is willing 
to approve the improvements.

https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8504