On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 17:25:26 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer:
No, the author of the @safe code expects bounds checking, it's
part of the requirements.
Take a look ad Ada language. It has bounds checking and its
compilers have a switch to disable those checks. If you want
the bounds checking don't use the switch that disables the
bounds checking. Safety doesn't mean to have no way to work
around safety locks. It means have nice handy locks that are
active on default. In a system language total safety is an
illusion. Better to focus on real world safety and not a
illusion of theoretical safety.
Bye,
bearophile
Yeah, it's like how I have matches in my house. I could use the
matches to burn my house down, but I don't think that I will.
That is, unless I can manage to pull off a really good insurance
fraud scam.
