New @safe rule: defensive closures

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Saturday, 28 May 2022 at 08:12:53 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> Good brainstorming. But I don't think it can work:

The root cause is that Walter does not want @safe to be a high 
level feature, as a result it will be easier to write @system 
code than @safe no matter what features he comes up with!!

If one instead frame @safe as easy high level programming and add 
some reasonable constraints and owning pointers/objects then 
things will fall into place. Then optimize.

Without that it will be a neverending tail chasing dance. Or you 
will end up with something that constantly gets in your way, like 
Rust. And that makes @system or a switch to Rust more attractive, 
so nothing to gain there...