@safe inference fundamentally broken

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:30:49 -0400, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr at gmx.ch> wrote:

> The fundamental issue seems to lie in methodology and it is that @safe  
> is approximated by the DMD implementation from the wrong side. Instead  
> of gradually banning usage of more and more constructs in @safe, the  
> implementation should have started out with not allowing any constructs  
> in @safe code and then should have gradually allowed more and more  
> manually verified to be memory safe constructs.

I think I was one of those who argued to do it gradually. I was wrong.  
When one is manually marking @safe things, it's not as bad as when the  
compiler is automatically marking them. But in either case, @safe doesn't  
really mean safe, so it is pretty much useless.

-Steve