D not considered memory safe

[monkyyy]

On Monday, 8 July 2024 at 15:27:49 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 7/6/24 16:56, aberba wrote:
>>  From another angle, would you choose "less freedom but more 
>> security" or "more freedom but less security"? You can't have 
>> both.
>
> Arguably, security is a form of freedom.

Maybe in some political theories, but on a computer? No

Binary and basically perfect data storage changes the 
fuzziness/analog required for those political theories.

Either the function has a throw in the code path or it doesnt; 
either a function throws on nan or treats it as a 0; for each 
type of error its either the compiler stops or it prints a 
warning people ignore.

When "safety is nessery for freedom" argument is made 
politically, at least they are referring to say freedom of 
movement is limited by the chance of muggers or something and 
theres at least tradeoffs to consider for humans following 
instructions poorly and large scale physical systems being 
inherently probabilistic.