On 10/3/2015 12:49 PM, deadalnix wrote:
On Saturday, 3 October 2015 at 19:43:13 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/3/2015 8:43 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
There are also some other, more minor issues. For example, when the language
specification speaks about "memory safety", it is really unclear what this
means, as the language designers seem to think it that it is fine to have
undefined behaviour in a section of code that is "verified memory safe".
Memory safety means no memory corruption is possible.
Therefore, there can be no undefined behavior in @safe code.
Overflowing an int is undefined behavior, but it is not memory corruption.
