[Not really OT] Crowdstrike Analysis: It was a NULL pointer from the memory unsafe C++ language.

[Paolo Invernizzi]

On Friday, 26 July 2024 at 22:26:03 UTC, Don Allen wrote:
> On Friday, 26 July 2024 at 08:57:42 UTC, aberba wrote:
>> [...]
>
> I could not agree more. Trying to glue Rust-like features onto 
> this language really feels like ill-considered imitation, not a 
> good look for a language that has already been accused of 
> jumping on bandwagons. It also does not make technical sense to 
> me. I've written comparable amounts of Rust and D and for 
> ordinary applications without real-time constraints, I much 
> prefer D, so I don't have to become an involuntary part of 
> Rust's complex approach to memory management. Saying equivalent 
> things in D is so much easier easier than in Rust. But the more 
> baroque D becomes, the harder it will be for newcomers to find 
> the subset of the language that works for them.

I'm just asking not to derail what is _already_ in the language, 
and to stick with the current documentation: @trusted interface 
MUST be safe, otherwise all the narrative about D, and core 
developments caring about memory safety is just impossible to 
bake.