On Wednesday, January 02, 2013 13:45:32 Maxim Fomin wrote: > I think it should not be fixed, but probably compiler may issue > warning at some circumstances when it can realize this situation.
It's a hole in @safe. It must be fixed. That's not even vaguely up for discussion. The question is _how_ to fix it. Ideally, it would be fixed in a way that limits how much more code has to become @system. > By the way, there is another issue with ref - > http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/928767a9 which was discussed several month > ago minimum. Do you think this should be also fixed? It's not a bug. You're dereferencing a null pointer, so you get a segfault. There's nothing surprising there. > I don't take into D's @safity seriously because it can be easily > hacked. It's fine if you don't care about it, but as the maintainers of the language and standard library, we have to take it seriously. Regardless of the likelihood of there being a bug caused by this, it breaks @safe, so it must be fixed, even if that means simply making all functions which both accept by ref and return by ref @system. But that's very undesirable, because it will lead to too much code being considered @system even when it's perfectly safe. Hence why this is being discussed. - Jonathan M Davis
