On Monday, March 19, 2018 17:15:26 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 19/03/2018 5:05 PM, Norm wrote: > > On Monday, 19 March 2018 at 03:53:07 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: > >> You just said the magic word, medical. > >> > >> D was never an appropriate fit here. > >> > >> dmd's backend has been for thirty years (or so) been up to recently > >> licensed so that you may not use it for this purpose. Nothing has > >> changed here. > > > > I have no idea what you're talking about now. > > > > What has the backend license got to do with medical? > > The code generation capabilities of dmd has not been certified for > medical usage. > > In essence, if it generated bad code, kills somebody, your the one at > fault, even if the source is fine. You would end up begging to settle > out of court. > > It is my understanding that medical software manufacturers pay for their > compilers already certified. So that suggests to me that you're not > exactly life threatening but I would still caution you away from D even > if that bit is just my own opinion.
It may be there are compilers certified for that sort of thing (I'm certainly no expert on the subject), but AFAIK, basically every compiler ever says that it's not certified or guaranteed for anything, because the compiler writers don't want to get sued if something goes wrong regardless of what you're using it for. - Jonathan M Davis
