On 5/6/14, 2:37 AM, JR wrote:
Apologies for the negativity. It's not that much of a deal, but your
code will have to be very unreliant upon phobos to be completely @safe.
It's a huge deal. Most of phobos should be @safe or @trusted! Please
submit everything you find as bugs. Thanks! -- Andrei
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 14:59:13 UTC, Etienne wrote:
On 2014-05-04 4:34 AM, Daniele M. wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a
possible
good candidate due to
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 15:01:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 5/5/14, 2:32 AM, JR wrote:
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack,
would it
have been possible to write it in @safe D? I guess that if
not,
module
On Tue, 06 May 2014 09:56:11 +0200
Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 05/05/2014 12:41 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > Regardless, there's
> > nothing fundamentally limited about @safe except for operations
> > which are actually unsafe with regards to memory
>
> What does
On 05/05/2014 12:41 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Regardless, there's
nothing fundamentally limited about @safe except for operations which are
actually unsafe with regards to memory
What does 'actually unsafe' mean? @safe will happily ban statements that
will never 'actually'
On 2014-05-05 2:54 PM, Daniele M. wrote:
Have you thought about creating an SSL/TLS implementations tester instead?
You mean testing existing TLS libraries using this information?
The advantages of using all-D is having zero-copy buffers that inline
with the other layers of streams when built
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 10:41:41 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 10:24:27 +
via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 09:32:40 UTC, JR wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
>> And then comes my next question: except fo
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 14:59:13 UTC, Etienne wrote:
On 2014-05-04 4:34 AM, Daniele M. wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a
possible
good candidate due to
05-May-2014 18:59, Etienne пишет:
On 2014-05-04 4:34 AM, Daniele M. wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a possible
good candidate due to its static typing and
On 5/5/14, 2:32 AM, JR wrote:
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack, would it
have been possible to write it in @safe D? I guess that if not,
module(s) could have been made un-@safe. Not saying that a similar
separat
On 2014-05-04 4:34 AM, Daniele M. wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a possible
good candidate due to its static typing and related features.
However, now I a
On Mon, 05 May 2014 10:24:27 +
via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 09:32:40 UTC, JR wrote:
> > On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
> >> And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack,
> >> would it have been possible to write it in @safe D? I
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 09:32:40 UTC, JR wrote:
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack,
would it have been possible to write it in @safe D? I guess
that if not, module(s) could have been made un-@safe. Not
saying t
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 21:18:24 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack,
would it have been possible to write it in @safe D? I guess
that if not, module(s) could have been made un-@safe. Not
saying that a similar separation of concerns was not possi
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 08:04:24 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 07:39:13 +
Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
Sometimes I wonder how much money have C design decisions cost
the industry in terms of anti-virus, static and dynamic
analyzers
tools, oper
On Mon, 05 May 2014 07:39:13 +
Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Sometimes I wonder how much money have C design decisions cost
> the industry in terms of anti-virus, static and dynamic analyzers
> tools, operating systems security enforcements, security research
> and so on.
>
> All avoi
On Monday, 5 May 2014 at 06:35:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sun, 04 May 2014 13:29:33 +
Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
The only language I would
really trust is one in which it is impossible to write unsafe
code, because you can then know that the developers can't use
On Sun, 04 May 2014 13:29:33 +
Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> The only language I would
> really trust is one in which it is impossible to write unsafe
> code, because you can then know that the developers can't use
> such unsafe hacks, even if they wanted to.
Realistically, I think that you
On 04/05/14 23:20, Daniele M. wrote:
You are right, devs would eventually abuse everything possible, although
it would make it for sure more visible: you cannot advertize an un-@safe
library as @safe, although I agree that a lot depends from devs/users
culture.
In D, you can at least staticall
On Sun, 04 May 2014 21:18:22 +
"Daniele M. via Digitalmars-d" wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 10:23:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
> Digitalmars-d wrote:
> And then comes my next question: except for that malloc-hack,
> would it have been possible to write it in @safe D? I guess that
> if no
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 13:29:34 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 08:34:20 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a
possible good candi
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 10:23:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sun, 04 May 2014 08:34:19 +
"Daniele M. via Digitalmars-d"
wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not ther
On 5/4/2014 9:29 AM, Meta wrote:
While D is a somewhat safer language by *default*, it makes it fairly
easy to escape from the safe part of the language and write unsafe code
Yea, I'm finding that in some ways, D accidentally encourages
@system/@trusted code. For example, if you need some sen
On Sunday, 4 May 2014 at 08:34:20 UTC, Daniele M. wrote:
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a
possible good candidate due to its static typing and related
features.
On Sun, 04 May 2014 08:34:19 +
"Daniele M. via Digitalmars-d" wrote:
> I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
>
> http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
>
> And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a
> possible good candidate due to its static typi
I have read this excellent article by David A. Wheeler:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/heartbleed.html
And since D language was not there, I mentioned it to him as a
possible good candidate due to its static typing and related
features.
However, now I am asking the community here: would a D
26 matches
Mail list logo
