More evidence that memory safety is the future for programming languages

[Arine]

On Saturday, 28 March 2020 at 23:14:05 UTC, rikki cattermole 
wrote:
> On 29/03/2020 9:24 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22711391
>> 
>> Fitting in with the push for @safe as the default, and the 
>> @live Ownership/Borrowing system for D.
>> 
>> We can either get on the bus or get run over by the bus.
>
> "This is why D requires and @live attribute be added to 
> functions to enable the checking for just those functions, so 
> it doesn't break every program out there."
>
> Interesting quote there.


Indeed it is interesting, on one hand, you have @safe being made 
the default, breaking all code in existence. And then you have 
@live being introduced so it doesn't break all code in existence. 
It seems @live is making the same mistake as @safe. How long 
until @live becomes the default?


I also find this claim to be quite bold:

> This is why D uses DFA to catch 100% of the positives with 0% 
> negatives.

When in the review thread previously the sentiment was along the 
lines of, "patch the holes as they appear". So how do you go from 
patching holes as they appear, to 100% guaranteeing it catches 
everything correctly, without thorough testing. Or is that just 
empty marketing promises?