Is the following well defined and allowed?

[Timon Gehr]

On 02.03.2018 15:39, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> 
> 
>> In this interpetation, -noboundscheck switches DMD to a different 
>> dialect of D. In that dialect, out-of-bounds accesses (and overlapping 
>> copies, apparently) always have UB, in both @system and @safe code. 
>> That defeats the purpose of @safe. Which is why I don't really care 
>> for that dialect.
> 
> I agree, I think we should remove the option to disable bounds checks on 
> @safe code, in any way. It's too dangerous. If you want performance that 
> comes without bounds checks, use a trusted escape, or write system code.

I.e., the -release flag should not remove assertions in @safe code, or 
at the very least it should not turn them into sources of UB.