@safe inference fundamentally broken

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 14:52:39 -0400, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr at gmx.ch> wrote:

> On 06/05/2014 08:35 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> 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.
>
> I don't understand. Both strategies are gradual.

One starts with a decidedly non-gradual breaking change.

-Steve