== Quote from Daniel Green (ven...@gmail.com)'s article
> On 4/18/2011 5:15 AM, Kagamin wrote:
> > Such feature would be fantastic.
> I don't see this becoming a feature of D for quite some time if ever
> although it would make the enforcement easier.
> Once the subsets are defined the next challenge is enforcing them. Two
> ideas come to me right now. Enforcing it by checking object symbols,
> most restrictions would generate some form of standardized symbol
> request. The other is to use the D frontend and create a sort of lint
> checker.
> > Where belong asserts and bound checks?
> _d_array_bounds does bounds checking.
> _d_assert_msg does asserts.
> That is what I meant by symbol checking. Since they exist as separate
> features with separate symbols They could be filtered into whatever
> level is most appropriate. asserts I'd place in kernel and bounds
> checking in drivers. Possibly low, but definately high.
Contracts would be out of the picture in kernel mode, and replaced with
something
creative. For example:
Code:
assert(condition);
Userspace:
// Raise Exception if false
_d_assert(condition);
Kernel space:
// Emit barrier saying that control flow will not pass here. ie: hlt for x86
if (unlikely(foo))
unreachable();
