On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:10:57 -0400, lzzll <[email protected]> wrote:
Let me ask:
1. That's mean if I write a safe library and another guy use it in the
wrong way, it still not really safe, right?
Garbage in, garbage out. The safe function must have reasonable
expectations, and it's up to you to meet them. Is it "mean"? I don't think
so. I think you have to adjust what you think @safe means.
2. In the real world use, if I received a segmentation fault that mean I
had to get the core dump and trace where is the problem, that's all
right. But if I not received anything but actually the bad memory has
been write or leak, that's the security issue.
If it's for a null pointer, you will not have a memory corruption.
3. I hope it will be truly safe in the future, prevent the access to
dangling pointer, is there any plan or idea for this?
This is actually impossible to implement.
-Steve
