DIP1000 observation

[Sergey]

On Monday, 2 September 2024 at 09:48:44 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:
> Safe Rust is too restrictive about mutability.
> DIP1000 is about extending the amount of code that can be 
> @safe. DIP1000 removes restrictions.

I think the question is not in the technical ability or inability 
to achieve something, but more in the intense from the community 
to do that and write code in that way.

It seems D community doesn't want to do these things, and Rust 
community wants. And it is fine.

So the question is only to achieve some kind of recognition from 
authorities, so they will consider D as a "safe language" (nobody 
really knows what is it and at which level of safety they can 
mark this kind of label to the language - I think current 
language selection was kinda random).

Just to make D available for hypothetical developers with 
government contracts (does DLF ever got any requests on that? 
really...)