On Sunday, 13 September 2015 at 15:35:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
But the idea that your average D program is going to run into
problems with the GC while using Phobos is just plain wrong.
The folks who need to care are the rare folks who need extreme
enough performance that they can't afford for the GC to _ever_
stop the world.
Even in that case not all threads need to be real-time and you
can do threads without GC.
Honestly I think only people using microcontrollers or really
constrained environments and don't have the memory have that
problem.
I suspect preciously few of the GC haters actually have those
requirements or misrepresents the ways to avoid GC-related
problems.
Same arguments but there is a solution for everything:
"Don't want memory overhead" => minimize heap usage, use -vgc /
-profile=gc
"Don't want pauses" => unregister thread + @nogc
"Want shorter pauses" => minimize heap usage, use -vgc /
-profile=gc
"Want determinism" => ways to do that
GC is basically ok for anything soft-realtime, where you already
spend a lot of time to go fast enough. And if you want
hard-realtime, well you wouldn't want malloc either.
It's a non-problem.
