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

[aberba]

On Sunday, 28 July 2024 at 14:35:08 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 7/27/24 19:35, aberba wrote:
>> On Saturday, 27 July 2024 at 09:40:03 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>> On Friday, 26 July 2024 at 22:26:03 UTC, Don Allen wrote:
>> 
>>> This is what I was looking forward back when I got "The D 
>>> Programming Language" book, instead,   the ecosystems listed 
>>> above either catched up in missing features where D had an 
>>> edge, or sprung to the existence, creating much bigger 
>>> ecosystems, while safety keeps being discussed on the forums, 
>>> GC or not GC, and so on the eternal discussion.
>> 
>> That's what happens when the vision is not clearly spelt out 
>> and iterated when such issues come up. It's leaves a void for 
>> other voices to fill in, making it seem like D is a risky bet 
>> for production.
>> 
>> I'm honestly not sure what the main vision or language 
>> direction for D is.
>
> It is a bit irritating to me how you ignore that a lot of those 
> priorities, including `@safe`, have been clearly spelled out by 
> Walter/Atila/Mike. On the forums, on bugzilla, by the work they 
> have been doing, in their dconf talks, the safe by default 
> DIPs, the meeting summaries. Who are those "other voices" 
> filling a supposed "void"? Maybe you have some catching up to 
> do?

I don't disagree I do have some catching up to do. Also found 
this write-up from 2yrs ago 
(https://github.com/dlang/vision-document) and I've not been 
using D much since 3-4yrs ago besides some few hobby projects and 
popping up here recently.

I wish this document was referenced whenever such discussions 
come (assuming it's still relevant).


This back-and-forth about the action plan to move to @safe by 
default (if it's even going to happen) isn't encouraging... I 
don't mind the debates, but this doing seem to be yield a 
resolution. Maybe you guys should meetup and hash things out.

We the regular users are the ones supposed to be pushing back, 
not the top contributors (core members??).