hello,

code below:
-----
    class a  {
        string a1;
    }

    a a1;
    writeln(a1.a1);
-----

compiles and produce "core dump" or "segfault", does this fit the original D design? why the compiler does not detect for accessing a null object and refused to compile?



And, 2nd question: where can I find the Subset spec of SafeD?


Thanks!

--------------
binghoo dang

On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 15:13:00 UTC, dangbinghoo wrote:
> hello,
>
> code below:
> -----
>     class a  {
>         string a1;
>     }
>
>     a a1;
>     writeln(a1.a1);
> -----
>
> compiles and produce "core dump" or "segfault", does this fit the original D design? why the compiler does not detect for accessing a null object and refused to compile?
>
>
>
> And, 2nd question: where can I find the Subset spec of SafeD?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> --------------
> binghoo dang


1.)
Yes this is by design. It is not easy to detect this at compile time.
It does not break safety

2.)
https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#function-safety
https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html
https://dlang.org/articles/safed.html#safed-subset

On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 15:29:32 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
> On Monday, 27 May 2019 at 15:13:00 UTC, dangbinghoo wrote:
>> hello,
>>
>
>
> 1.)
> Yes this is by design. It is not easy to detect this at compile time.
> It does not break safety
>
> 2.)
> https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#function-safety
> https://dlang.org/spec/memory-safe-d.html
> https://dlang.org/articles/safed.html#safed-subset

thanks a lot.

so, The SafeD Subset consists of [function-safety, memory-safety].