[dmd-internals] Throwing Errors

[Jason House]

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 15, 2012, at 12:29 PM, Sean Kelly <sean at invisibleduck.org> wrote:

> It seems there may be somewhat of a difference between D and SafeD here, because the latter should be immune to memory corruption (which is what I think of when you say the program is corrupted). So for SafeD I'd expect most errors to come from contract clauses and RangeErrors. Should D still make things worse by not attempting any cleanup?  I'll admit I'm torn. 

Is it legal to catch an error in SafeD? Based in the discussion in this thread, I think the answer should be "no". Given that, I don't think SafeD should go out of its way to make unsafe code safer.