[phobos] Making std.stdio.readf @safe

[Jakub Łabaj via phobos]

What about fgetc_unlocked then? It may be not thread safe if used 
without lock, is it considered unsafe because of bad usage or 
just unsafe? Sorry, I still have some problems with identifying 
this.

On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 18:01:38 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> Safe/trusted means "no unsafe operation", not "will cause 
> issues if used incorrectly". -- Andrei
>
> On 2/7/17 12:59 PM, Jakub Łabaj via phobos wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 7 February 2017 at 17:45:00 UTC, Andrei 
>> Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> This may be hasty. https://linux.die.net/man/2/flock does not 
>>> perform
>>> any unsafe operation, even for invalid arguments. -- Andrei
>>>
>>> On 2/7/17 11:44 AM, Walter Bright via phobos wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/7/2017 6:00 AM, Jakub Łabaj via phobos wrote:
>>>>> Ok, so I have doubts whether these functions can be 
>>>>> @trusted. On the
>>>>> one hand
>>>>> they get just FILE* as an argument which (as I see it) 
>>>>> makes it safe
>>>>> interface.
>>>>> On the other hand FGETC is unlocked version of fgetc and 
>>>>> requires
>>>>> explicit lock
>>>>> to be used safely; FLOCK and FUNLOCK invocations should 
>>>>> match,
>>>>> therefore there
>>>>> is also possibility to use it incorrectly. Personally I 
>>>>> would not mark
>>>>> them
>>>>> @trusted then, is it correct?
>>>>
>>>> I'd say you're right.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> phobos mailing list
>>>> phobos at puremagic.com
>>>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>
>> FLOCK is aliased (at Linux) to 
>> https://linux.die.net/man/3/flockfile .
>> It may be safe on its own, but to avoid deadlock must be 
>> followed by
>> call to unlock. Does it qualify to be @trusted in such case?
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos at puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos