Can we just have struct inheritence already?

[Walter Bright]

On 6/10/2019 3:56 PM, Manu wrote:
> Uninitialised data, which is guaranteed to have no valid state, and
> has absolutely no chance of proper program execution under any
> circumstance, and may even be leaking internal/private state(!), is
> not safe. You can't convince me otherwise.

It is memory safe. It's a fact, not an opinion.

If you want @safe to mean "no undefined behavior", that is a valid opinion, but 
that is not what @safe in D is currently defined as. It is currently defined as 
"memory safe". If you can find a case where an int with garbage in it can cause 
memory corruption in @safe code, that would indeed be a bug in D.

> It is arbitrary. Almost everything comes down to "I like this", or "I
> don't like this", and the noise in the middle is mostly a waste of our
> time.

Most of language design is indeed subjective. But things like "memory safety" 
are fairly well defined in an objective manner.

> Occasionally argument improves outcomes, but for the most part, we're
> all just wasting time here.

Saying "you can't convince me otherwise" guarantees discussing things won't 
work. :-)