Doesn't GC, @nogc, safe, nothrown, * get in the way of getting things done?

[Dukc]

On Thursday, 11 June 2020 at 11:28:07 UTC, aberba wrote:
> What becomes the ideal trade-off??

In my opinion, in principle almost everything should be `@safe` 
and `pure`. With `@safe`, it's mainly the interfaces to other 
languages and some low-level memory handling or typecasting that 
needs to be `@system`. This applies even to system programming: 
If you look at the source of Powernex, surprisingly large parts 
of it are `@safe` even when it's obviously very low level stuff. 
With `pure`, IO is the main thing that can't be pure, pretty much 
everything else should be. You usually should not need global 
variables, so you should not need impurity either.

In practice, though, the annotations tend to be leaved off 
because some library function being called does not use the 
attributes. In case of `@safe`, one can work around this with 
`@trusted`, but doing `pure` interface to such a library might 
require too dirty hacks to be worth it.

With `nothrow` and `@nogc` it's more situation and taste 
dependant. A general rule of thumb is that the lower level the 
code, the more likely you want to use them. Also the return of 
investment with these attributes isn't as high as with the first 
two. They might not be worth the effort for a typical application 
if they require any significant rethinking, even if the function 
should in principle have the attributes.