const std = @import("std");
pub fn main() anyerror!void {
std.debug.warn("{}\n", .{.{
@sizeOf(*usize),
comptime @sizeOf(*usize)
}});
}
> It is on production runs that the security is most required, since it is the results of production runs that will actually be trusted as the basis of actions such as expenditure of money and perhaps even lives. The strategy now recommended to many programmers is equivalent to that of a sailor who wears a lifejacket during his training on dry land but takes it off when he is sailing his boat on the sea. It is small wonder that computers acquire a bad reputation when programmed in accordance with this common policy.
It is also quoted by Donald Knuth in "Structured programming with goto statements" (1974) [1] ( which incidentally is also the source of the quote about premature optimization):
> He [Tony Hoare] points out quite correctly that the current practice of compiling subscript range checks into the machine code while a program is being tested, then suppressing the check during production runs, is like a sailor who wears his life preserver while training on land but leaves it behind when he sails!
[0]: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:dff9483b-e72f-4599-bf90-76... p. 341
[1]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/356635.356640 p. 269