D not considered memory safe

[Dukc]

Dennis kirjoitti 13.7.2024 klo 20.16:
> On Thursday, 11 July 2024 at 16:26:59 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> The way to do it incrementally is to start by labeling each function 
>> @trusted, then making them @safe one by one.
>>
>> I've done this, it works.
> 
> I know you've done the first part, because there's now 1122 `@trusted` 
> functions in  dmd.backend. Many of them have an unsafe interface such as:
> 
> ```D
> @trusted
> void list_delete(list_t list) { free(list); }
> ```
> 
> Not much actual `@safe` code has come from it unfortunately.
> 

Why in the world Walter did that?

He has complained that lambdas like `(@trusted { list.list_delete(); 
})()` are a bad practice, since they hide the fact a `@safe` function is 
actually calling unsafe functions. But isn't this much worse? Not only 
are `@safe` functions calling unsafe functions, there isn't even a 
`@trusted` in the function body to warn about the fact!

I'd have expected Walter to mark the calling functions `@trusted` 
instead, if he feels the lambda trick is too dangerous.