assume, assert, enforce, @safe

[Daniel Gibson via Digitalmars-d]

Am 01.08.2014 12:03, schrieb "Marc Schütz" <schuetzm at gmx.net>":
>
> A compiler is a program that turns code in one programming language to
> equivalent machine code, according to a language specification. There
> are obviously many different equivalent machine code programs
> corresponding to any sufficiently complex higher-level program.
> Classifying them into optimized and unoptimized ones is rather
> arbitrary. The same goes for safe vs. unsafe optimizations.
>
> To achieve what you want, the compiler would have to ignore the actual
> language specification and use a different one that is tweaked according
> to your criteria. I don't think this is desirable. If the official
> language specification has parts that can lead to the errors you want to
> avoid, then it's not the compiler's fault, and therefore the compiler
> should not be changed to workaround it. Instead, deficiencies in the
> specification should be fixed there.

I'd prefer language specifications *not* to include such parts.
C wouldn't be any worse without the "you can eliminate writes to code 
that's not read afterwards" part, for example.

So I wish D could resist adding such "dangerous"/unexpected things to 
the standard and only allow such optimizations in an "unsafe" 
optimization mode.

Cheers,
Daniel