== Quote from Don ([email protected])'s article > I want TempAlloc in dcore! Eventually, anyway.
The only problem is that, in its current form, TempAlloc is kind of dangerous because it puts the onus on the programmer to not store the only reference to a reference type in a TempAlloc-allocated block. If TempAlloc were more tightly integrated with the GC, this could be solved easily with negligible overhead. One would simply have to keep a thread-local variable that tracks how many blocks are currently in use, kind of like the stack pointer in the call stack, and a bit array that tracks whether each block that is currently in use should be scanned. However, without GC integration, just making everything scanned would cause so many false pointer issues and slowdowns when GC is run that I decided that, for now, given the anticipated use cases, making it a little dangerous and scanning nothing was the lesser of two evils.
