on Sun Nov 06 2016, Daniel Duan <daniel-AT-duan.org> wrote: >> On Nov 6, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> A construct that is only conditionally unsafe >> shouldn't be spelled "unsafe" when used in a safe way, right? So this >> *seems* to argue for an "unsafe" keyword that can be used to label >> the constructs that actually add unsafety (as has been previously >> suggested on this list). Other ideas are of course most welcome. >> > > How would “unsafe” coexist with memory ownership model? It seems to me > that there’s some overlapping concepts here (borrowed/moved).
Yes, the ownership model covers borrowing. > I haven’t formulated any complete thoughts on this topic. Just had a > feeling that we should take the ownership model in mind as we tackle > this. That was a main point of my posting. Apologies if that wasn't made clear. -- -Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
