Memory Safe Programming

[GB]

On Monday, 17 August 2026 at 16:21:39 UTC, libxmoc wrote:
> On Sunday, 16 August 2026 at 08:50:38 UTC, GB wrote:
>> It's primarly about memory safety in C, but D gets a mention 
>> in the Appendix I.
>>
>> But it raises the question: why isn't @safe not the default in 
>> D?
>>
>> https://strawberry9.github.io/the-wrong-memory
>
> Memory safety is best when it is intentionally, forcing it 
> everywhere by default usually achieves the opposite of its goal 
> by adding unnecessary friction
>
> D shouldn't try to replicate Rust, its real strength is 
> ipragmatism, giving the flexibility to opt into safety where it 
> matters without imposing it where it doesn't

C: the programmer must maintain the invariant. The result?
See: 
https://strawberry9.github.io/the-wrong-memory/Appendix_02.html

D safe subset: the programmer must stay within a subset whose 
rules maintain the invariant.

A stronger design: the language's semantics make the invariant 
unavoidable, except at explicitly identified escape boundaries.

'Safe by default' is not the same thing as 'safety is a language 
property.'

C++ made the mistake of trying to have a 'safe subset' without 
making the subset's invariants fundamental to the language 
itself. Did D make the same mistake?