If you needed any more evidence that memory safety is the future...

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 25.02.2017 15:38, Chris Wright wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 13:23:03 +0100, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> If 'disable' (as can be reasonably expected) means the compiler will
>> behave as if they were never present, then it does not.
>
> https://dlang.org/dmd-linux.html#switch-release
>

This literally says "[...] assertion failures are undefined behaviour".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

> Plus I actually tested it.
> ...

Why would that matter?

>> Ketmar described the removal of safety measures. With -release,
>> assertions pose an additional safety risk.
>
> Assertions not executing is not undefined behavior.
>

I didn't say it was.


I know my claim seems insane, but it is actually true.

http://forum.dlang.org/post/lr4kek$2rd$1@digitalmars.com