Is @safe still a work-in-progress?

[Walter Bright]

On 8/28/2018 6:12 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> So this would mean a member function would have to be refactored into a 
> different function with a different calling syntax. i.e:
> 
> x.foo(target);
> 
> would have to be refactored to:
> 
> target.foo(x);
> 
> or foo(target, x);

Maybe it should be anyway.


> But in terms of put, strictly speaking, any call of some.pipeline.put(x) is 
> wrong. It should be put(some.pipeline, x), to avoid issues with how put was 
> designed.

There are some of those in Phobos, too. It's covered by the proposed addition.


>> I don't know how to prove anything with programming languages.
> I don't mean prove like mathematical proof. I mean try to consider how this 
> affects all cases instead of just the one case that will make phobos compile.
> 
> "show" is a better verb than "prove".

I don't know how to find all cases, either, except by implementing it.