How do people feel about putting source compiler directives inside rdmd?

[mipri]

On Tuesday, 3 December 2019 at 02:02:08 UTC, mipri wrote:
> This level of scare-mongering about some trivial array
> manipulation is absurd to the point that I actually start to
> suspect malicious intentions. Who sent you and how much are
> they paying you?

I wasn't kidding about this, but a more charitable
interpretation is: you don't use scripts, don't much care about
rdmd, and just want resources to go towards something else
instead. "c'mon guys, have you heard of makefiles? This is a
solved problem. Please work on something instead of this rdmd
thing that I'm not sure anyone even uses." Due to the
restricted communication channel (text) and certain internet
habits (everyone's spouting off like an authority about
everything, so weakly-stated claims are easily lost in the
noise) this reasonable wish can come across as I took it.

Well, not to worry:

1. This feature would only affect people using scripts, and
realistically any bugs would also only affect people using the
feature.

2. Technically it's easy enough that pretty much anyone could
do it. It'd be a good task for me, for example, when I probably
can't contribute to whatever you're thinking about as a more
desirable development.

So more relevant objections are stuff like "wouldn't letting
someone add -J in a script let them steal /etc/passwd with a
string import?" (there's no reason to give the dmd binary
setuid privs or anything so compile-time and run-time access
should be the same, but maybe there's some crazy circumstance
where this matters with selinux or OpenBSD stuff).