On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 22:38:58 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
On 24.05.20 00:17, Arafel wrote:
On 24/5/20 0:02, ag0aep6g wrote:
... and @system static constructors and `--boundscheck=off`
and initializers of globals
Other than `--boundscheck=off`, that is presumably actively
chosen by the user (as is @trust), would the others be allowed
without `@trusted` in otherwise 100% @safe code?
Yup. Today they can be unmarked, defaulting to @system. With
DIP 1028, they can be explicitly marked @system. Either way,
they don't show up when you only look for "@trusted".
I would find concerning that any @system code is allowed, but
I guess initializers of globals should be ok as long as they
are @safe themselves?
As long as they're @safe, sure. But they can also be @system.
An example:
----
const int x = 42;
const int y = 43;
void main() @safe
{
import std.stdio;
writeln(x, " ", y); /* Prints "42 43" as expected. */
auto px = &x;
auto py = &y;
writeln(*px, " ", *py); /* Prints "13 14". Wat? */
}
int* p = cast(int*) &x;
static this() @system { *p = 13; *++p = 14; }
----
That works even if you make the static this() @safe, and remove
the pointer incrementation.
You'd have to make the p initialization @safe.
@safe:
int* p = cast(int*) &x; // error
But note this doesn't work:
@safe int* p = cast(int*) &x; // compiles
Having the default become @safe will help detect this, as I don't
imagine that is a whole lot of usage of @safe: to begin with.
