On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 18:08 Jon Gilbert via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> See below. > > On Dec 6, 2017, at 02:45, Nick Keets via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > Apologies, I may have misunderstood you. What I wanted to say is that I > see no problem allowing "dangerous" stuff that may be abused. > > > You see no problem with danger and abuse? > > I guess we have differing philosophies... > > https://developer.apple.com/swift/ states: > > “Swift eliminates entire classes of unsafe code.” > > Lets keep it that way. > > I’m all for this proposal if it can be tweaked to where any of the > dangerous invocations contain the word, “Unsafe”, or equivalent. > Again, in Swift, “safety” means something very specific. Trapping at runtime is safe; in fact, trapping at runtime is *precisely the means by which safety is achieved* in the case of integer overflow and array indexing. This proposal introduces nothing that is unsafe. ~Jon > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
