Memory safety depends entirely on GC ?

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 2/24/2015 11:12 AM, bearophile wrote:
> I don't like the look of the annotations of DIP25. I'd like DIP25 removed from D
> language and replaced by a more principled solution. Sometimes a heavier
> solution can be simpler to understand (and it can be actually safe).

So far, DIP25 has been called by various posters unprincipled, hackish, and 
stupid, without supporting rationale.

Note the thread "A Refcounted Array Type" thread, which uses DIP25 to implement 
a memory safe ref counted container. It is simple and requires exactly one 
annotation. It seems pretty straightforward to me, and so far nobody has shown 
any holes in it, or has even commented on the principle of it. (complaints about 
bounds checking, delete, etc., are off-topic)