On Saturday, 4 January 2014 at 04:20:30 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
On Saturday, 4 January 2014 at 02:27:24 UTC, Kelet wrote:
While `@safe` helps reduce this class of logic errors […]
you can still have […] dangling pointers, hence it is
usually considered inferior with regards to safety.
This is not true. While it _is_ possible to get null pointers
in @safe code, they are not a safety problem, as the first page
is never mapped in any D processes (yes, I'm aware of the
subtle issues w.r.t. object size here, c.f. Bugzilla). And if
you find a way to obtain a dangling pointer in @safe code,
please report it to the bug tracker, this is not supposed to
happen.
There was a SafeD[1] subset of D being worked on, but I'm not
sure if it is active anymore.
SafeD is D in @safe mode.
Cheers,
David
Thanks for the corrections.
Ultimately, it sounds like Rust primarily takes the 'default on'
approach for things like safety and immutability, whereas D takes
the 'default off' approach.
Regards,
Kelet
