nogc v0.5.0 - DIP1008 works!

[Paolo Invernizzi]

On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 10:01:15 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
> On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 09:07:48 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
>> On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 08:54:45 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>> On Friday, 24 May 2019 at 16:51:11 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
>>
>>> Then there's the fact that if a 3rd party library really does 
>>> want to corrupt memory they can just tag all their functions 
>>> with @trusted, and unless someone looks at their code nobody 
>>> will be the wiser.
>>
>> ... and a @safe conscious programmer will not touch that 
>> library ever with a 5 five meters pole.
>>
>> I'm still not convinced that trusted code should accept 
>> generic system code ... can you elaborate more?
>
> I'm not convinced either - I'm having a dialogue to figure out 
> potential issues.

:-)

My nice-try to reduce the problem is: trusted code block needs to 
by "manually verified" for safety by humans, so it should be 
"@safe pure", aka, if you can't perform the analysis looking only 
at the statements in the trusted block, that can't be marked 
trusted.