On Friday, 6 July 2018 at 21:15:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 08:16:36PM +0000, Ecstatic Coder via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...]
I've never said that this is something smart to do. I'm just
saying that this code can perfectly be executed once in a C++
game frame without having to worry for a game freeze, because
the string buffer deallocation is done once per frame too.
While with many GC languages, you actually DON'T KNOW when all
those unused string buffers will be claimed.
[...]
Of course, for someone looking for an excuse not to use D, they
will always find another reason why this is not sufficient. But
that only strengthens the point that the GC is just a
convenient excuse not to use D.
Not a good excuse to not fix GC, though.
Solve that problem, and they will just move on to the next
excuse, because the GC is not the real reason; the real reason
is probably non-technical. Like good ole inertia: people are
lazy and set in their ways, and resist changing what they've
grown comfortable with. But actually admitting this would make
them look bad, so it is easier to find a convenient excuse like
the GC (or whatever else is different from the status quo).
If that's the case, then we are doom. We might just as well
forget about getting popular, and instead spend time making the
language better.
Like fixing the GC.
(Although I don't quite agree with you. Some people DO resist
change, that's why some decades old languages are still popular.
But look at the popularity of new languages like Go, and Rust,
and the ever-change landscape of front-end development. There're
tons of people who adapt certain technology just because it is
new, why can't that happen to D?)
T
