And there are existing deployments where it's not desired and not a
requirement...

The original sin is thinking that any one engineer knows all domains and
anything that doesn't fit their preconceptions is universally wrong. P2900
has been in development for a long time, and is useful and needed. The idea
it's "unsafe" shows a lack of understanding of what that word means.

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 11:28 AM Ville Voutilainen <
ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 at 21:24, Ryan McDougall <mcdougall.ryan_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> > I think the next line is suggestive: "standard library hardening must be
> allowed to be turned on regardless of what the evaluation semantics of
> contracts in the rest of the program and even in the same TU are." -- this
> is patently not true:
>
> It's patently true. There are existing deployments where it's desired
> to the point of being a requirement that all use of the standard
> library is hardened, regardless of whether
> your program is.
>