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

[Guillaume Piolat]

On Sunday, 28 July 2024 at 14:25:14 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>
> What is even the point? If you think maintaining a memory-safe 
> interface is a waste of time and a non-feature, something that 
> nobody actually needs, don't even attempt to do it.
>

I want to use it to find memory-safety bugs and see the foretold 
benefits, and indeed because other users of my libs may have 
untrusted inputs.

One roadblock is those two semantic meaning of @trusted.

Many libraries with large attack surface, such as codecs, use a 
kind of unsafe iterator to parse input, making most function 
system. Porting C code locks you into that @system world, and 
it's probably why people start libraries with a top-level @safe:

Now if you don't go @safe: on top-level, then yes there is only 
one semantic meaning to @trusted. I'd be happy with some other 
word, just like const_cast doesn't exist in D.