On Saturday, 18 January 2014 at 02:59:43 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/17/2014 6:42 PM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad"
<[email protected]>" wrote:
But then you have to define "invalid state",
An unexpected value is an invalid state.
It is only an invalid state for a subsystem, if your code is
written to handle it, it can contain it and recover (or disable
that subsystem). Assuming that you know that it unlikely to be
caused by memory corruption.
The problem with being rigid on this definition is that most
non-trivial programs are constantly in an invalid state and
therefore should not be allowed to even start. Basically you
should stop making DMD available, it contains bugs, it is
constantly in an invalid state vs the published model. State is
not only variables. State is code too. (e.g. state machine).
What is the essential difference between insisting on stopping a
program with bugs and insisting on not starting a program with
bugs? There is no difference.
Still, most companies ship software with known non-fatal bugs.
