On Friday, 29 May 2020 at 11:33:01 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
On Thursday, 28 May 2020 at 16:01:35 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
[snip]
This would be another round of massively breaking user code.
The breakage will be split in two rounds, but the amount of
code needed to be modified would be the same as with the
safe-by-default-except-for-extern-non-c. With the possibility
of not needing the second round.
I know, arguing for a lost cause...
At the end of the day, I think people would accept "massively
breaking user code" if there is a good justification and doesn't
drive a hole through @safe.
