On Thursday, 14 January 2021 at 15:18:28 UTC, ddcovery wrote:
I understand perfectly the D community people that needs to work without GC: **it is not snobbish**: it is a real need. But not only a "need"... sometimes it is basically the way a team wants to work: explicit memory management vs GC.
D already supports manual memory management so that escape hatch was always there. My main criticism of D is the inability to freely exchange the GC algorithms as one type of GC might not be the best fit for everyone. The problem is of course that there is no differentiation between raw and fat pointers. With fat pointers, the community would have a better opportunities to experiment with different GC designs which would lead to a larger palette of GC algorithms.
