Memory safe in D

[Meta]

On Tuesday, 26 March 2024 at 22:31:56 UTC, Richard (Rikki) Andrew 
Cattermole wrote:
> Yes, and unfortunately it appears nobody except Paul has 
> opinions about its existence.
>
> https://forum.dlang.org/post/ucdmmlxklanpsggqmwas@forum.dlang.org
>
> I put a lot of work into type state analysis that deals with 
> uninitialized/initialized, nullable/non-null type states.

With all due respect, why did you put so much work into something 
you know won't be taken seriously by this community?

> It has been pretty disheartening to see this thread and then 
> look at my proposal for it and there just isn't anyone with 
> counter proposals or issues it may bring. Not even Walter 
> saying he sees nothing wrong with it currently.

There's like, maybe 5-10 people here who have the necessary 
background to even be able to understand and critique your 
proposal. The majority of people who use D come from a C/C++ 
background, and don't care about type state, or understand why 
it's useful. Rust _had_ support for typestate, and they _removed_ 
most of it. Rust already gets a lot of criticism here for being 
overly complex, so if it was too complex a feature for Rust, why 
would it ever be accepted into D? Even adding a bottom type to D 
was controversial.

I say this all as someone who would love to have a robust 
typestate system for D, but it just ain't gonna happen. D is just 
not the language for it. Your best bet is to either propose it 
for OpenD, or fork it and implement it yourself.