On Wednesday, January 24, 2018 21:24:16 Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Wednesday, 24 January 2018 at 19:12:50 UTC, Steven > > Schveighoffer wrote: > > While I understand your argument, the truth is that avoiding > > null dereferencing *statically* has to be built into the > > language from the beginning. As D is already too far along to > > retrofit this, your 2 options are: > > > > a) instrument the code, as Jonathan suggests (every dereference > > checks for null ahead of time). > > > > b) restrict your code, design, and functions that you use to > > ensure null pointers cannot happen. > > There's also: > > c) Improve/split the language by introducing -dip25 / -dip1000 > and hope that people interested in memory safety will migrate > their code to it.
Those really have nothing to do with null pointers though. - Jonathan M Davis
