On Monday, 25 May 2020 at 01:04:24 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 24.05.20 11:10, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/23/2020 11:26 PM, Bruce Carneal wrote:
I don't believe that you or any other competent programmer
greenwashes safety critical code. Regardless, the safety
conscious must review their dependencies whatever default
applies.
That's the theory. But we do, for various reasons. I've seen
it a lot over the years, at all levels of programming ability.
It particularly happens when someone needs to get the code
compiling and running, and the error message is perceived as a
nuisance getting in the way.
We should be very careful about adding nuisances to the
language that make it easier to greenwash than to do the job
correctly.
Implicit greenwashing by the compiler is a nuisance that makes
it harder to do the job correctly and easier to do the wrong
thing.
Yes, it would be a big nuisance. Absent a change in the DIP the
safety conscious who want to continue with D will try to back out
the compiler lies as best they can: additional tooling,
additional code review strictures, selective rewrites, ...
Not sure how that unfortunate future would play out exactly but
it would not be pretty. Much much better to fix the DIP.
