DIP 1021--Argument Ownership and Function Calls--Final Review

Walter Bright newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Thu Sep 19 10:17:43 UTC 2019

A bit of friendly advice - berating me is not a great way to sell me on your 
ideas. My natural reaction to that is to look hard for ways to reject it. If 
your idea really is better, then you lose, I lose, and the D community loses.

A much better method is to start by:

1. explaining that your method meets the requirement of 100% mechanically 
checkable memory safety, that it's not just a collection of "best practices".

2. pointing to an existing implementation in another language that proves point 
(1) would be very helpful.

3. explaining why it is better than the ownership/borrowing model.

Note that Rust has user base of 50,000. There's pretty strong evidence that it 
works. I haven't seen any articles or ripostes showing that it doesn't work.

That's what any competing proposal simply has to compare itself to. Not just me, 
but anyone else who is interested in using D for 100% memory safe code.


P.S. I've encouraged people for the last 10 years to submit proposals on how to 
make D memory safe. Nothing happened but a few hand-wavy suggestions. I gave up 
waiting, now I'm moving forward one way or another. If that's what it takes to 
get people motivated to come up with better proposals, that's good!

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list