On 8/25/24 13:06, Dom DiSc wrote:
>
> But I fully agree, this should be replaced by true trusted blocks, the
> sooner the better.
You cannot have a "trusted block". It just does not work. The interface
to any trusted thing has to be clearly delineated.
Well it obviously does work in some sense, because it's the de facto standard that people generally expect in numerous languages.
People are going to have it one way or another; whether it's a ridiculous hack like `()@trusted { ... }();` or otherwise. It's what other languages with this sort of thing do.
We don't have a better offering to motivate people to deviate from their patterns.
Resisting that degrades D.