On 22.05.20 19:54, Atila Neves wrote:
Right. And the point I was trying to make wasn't "look at what I did,
it's cool". No, what I did was dumb. So dumb it took you no time at all
to point out one of my mistakes. My point is that the result of making
declarations implicity @system instead of @safe would make people just
slap @safe on them without really thinking about it to get their code to
compile. Like I did.
Now you have accepted a DIP that does the dumb thing automatically. How
is that any better?
[...]
If we don't care about the guarantees of @safe as long as you are
using C libraries, why are we bothering at all with any of this?
We care. Annotations become explicit. Do I think this is ideal? No.
"Annotations become explicit." - What now? I probably misunderstand that
sentence, but DIP 1028 does not require explicit annotations. That's why
everyone is upset.
