Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
This is really not a good idea. You've removed one of the core features of the array -- memory safety. Doing this is just asking for memory corruption. You should either re-slice the original array, or create a type that has a reference to the original array so it can be resliced
I explicitly said that it was unsafe code and off course most situations would be better suited with the extra abstraction or re slice the original.
