On 18.08.19 14:51, victoroak wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 August 2019 at 20:42:46 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>
>> I don't understand why you think I think using Rust for inspiration is a bad thing. I'm not opposed to doing what Rust does. Rust _actually does some version of what I suggested in my last post_. The problem is that it seems that very few people actively participating on this forum actually understand what it is that Rust does. (E.g., a very common misconception is that Rust unsafe is like D @system. Rust unsafe is actually like D @trusted. Another misconception is that Rust ensures that raw mutable pointers don't alias.)
>>
> 
> Rust do have unsafe functions that can only be called inside unsafe blocks so it's like @system functions in D.

This is true of course. What I mean is some people think unsafe _blocks_ are like @system in D, even though they are Rust's version of @trusted. Thanks!

On Saturday, 17 August 2019 at 12:09:19 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 16.08.19 11:34, Atila Neves wrote:
>> But, right now, it's possible to corrupt memory in D without the compiler telling you,
>
> It's important to note that the reason why this happens is that there is @trusted code that doesn't account for all ways @safe code can access its interface. I.e., it's bad @trusted code, and inexpressive type system, not unsound type system. The only ways to fix this are
>
> 1) add more runtime checking to @trusted code and don't directly expose mutable references where this is problematic.
> 2) give more type system tools to @trusted code to restrict how @safe code may access its interface, so exposing mutable references directly is valid in more circumstances.
>
>> and that's not a thing we want.
>
> None of the borrow/ownership proposals in the pipeline do anything that would allow @trusted code to restrict the set of possible access patterns from @safe code. They are a form of Rust cargo cult.

So you've mentioned, but I'm afraid I didn't understand the argument (it didn't help it was over several emails). I would really appreciate an explanation of why you think the current proposals are inadequate, and what we could do instead. Thanks!