Don wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
bearophile wrote:
An important purpose of a not bug-prone language is remove as many
undefined situations as possible.
That's right.
If you add that to D2 specs, can
the compiler catch at compile time all cases of violations to that
rule?
Unlikely. But that has to be weighed against the former behavior being
defined in a useless way.
We could get close, I think. We could catch all violations in SafeD.
Disallow calling core.stdc.fenv functions from inside SafeD modules, and
provide an RAII object in std.math for changing the rounding mode.
Actually there's probably a few other C functions we want to prohibit in
SafeD -- the infamous string functions, for example.
Yes, all the C functions will have to be gone through and separated.
strlen() is safe, while strcpy() and printf() are not.
I think the goal should be try to remove undefined behaviour from SafeD.
Long term goal: "If a program uses no system modules other than those
provided in the standard library, it should not be exposed to undefined
behaviour." ?
Right!
