[OffTopic] A vulnerability postmortem on Network Security Services
schveiguy at gmail.com
Wed Dec 8 15:46:31 UTC 2021
On 12/3/21 10:23 PM, rikki cattermole wrote:
> 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.
I proposed [during the
that you can assume `extern(C)` functions are `@safe` as long as they
are mangled differently. I think that would both solve the problems
people had, and allow `extern(C)` to be safe by default.
Walter seemingly ignored it, but silently [hated
it](https://email@example.com), so I
don't see that happening.
More information about the Digitalmars-d