-preview=safer for D

[Lance Bachmeier]

On Monday, 16 December 2024 at 14:24:53 UTC, Richard (Rikki) 
Andrew Cattermole wrote:
> On 17/12/2024 3:10 AM, Lance Bachmeier wrote:
>> On Sunday, 15 December 2024 at 12:05:46 UTC, matheus wrote:
>> 
>>> Some people are lazy and they will just write/do things to 
>>> get the job done unfortunately.
>> 
>> "Lazy" and "unfortunately" are not accurate. Memory safety 
>> comes with a non-trivial cost, and in many cases, no benefit.
>
> Neither is this fully accurate.
>
> Memory safety when it properly models memory movement, does 
> offer benefits in terms of optimization. Both logical bugs, and 
> memory safety related issues can be caught.

But that's only a benefit if the optimization matters. For most 
of what I do, it doesn't. If you use the GC for your D code but 
interact with C libraries, you have the PITA of the compiler 
saying something's not memory safe, but 100% of the time spent 
getting it to compile is memory safety theater.