[OffTopic] A vulnerability postmortem on Network Security Services

rikki cattermole rikki at cattermole.co.nz
Sat Dec 4 03:23:07 UTC 2021

On 04/12/2021 3:03 PM, bachmeier wrote:
> I understand. It was during this conversation that I realized D has no 
> strategy that will allow it to evolve (and no strategy to develop such a 
> strategy). The cost of making an extreme change like safe by default is 
> that you have to accept a compiler flag or some other compromise. That 
> seems to be off the table, which makes it hard to see D being much 
> different in 2041 than it is now.

In this particular case, I say break my code.

Quite literally one small change, no function body? @system and we would 
have supported the DIP.

Nobody has stepped up to make an amended DIP however.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list