On Wednesday, 7 March 2018 at 15:26:01 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07.03.2018 15:08, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 March 2018 at 13:55:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
[...]
Jonathan, I understand your point, but still I can't find an
answer to clarify my doubts.
Are we asking for no UB in @safe code?
Are we asking for UB in @safe code but constrained to no
memory corruptions?
/Paolo
UB is unconstrained by definition. If it is constrained, it is
not UB.
That! Thanks!
So, @safe code is code where UB should not be possible?
Is it pragmatically possible to reach that goal?
/Paolo
