Program logic bugs vs input/environmental errors

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 4 October 2014 at 08:39:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> If someone writes non-robust software, D allows them to do 
> that. However, I won't leave unchallenged attempts to pass such 
> stuff off as robust.
>
> Nor will I accept such practices in Phobos, because, as this 
> thread clearly shows, there are a lot of misunderstandings 
> about what robust software is. Phobos needs to CLEARLY default 
> towards solid, robust practice.

Would it help to clarify my intentions in this discussion if I 
said that, on this note, I entirely agree -- and nothing I have 
said in this discussion is intended to be an argument about how 
Phobos should be designed?