Simen Kjaeraas пишет: > Weed <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> I think the point you're trying to make is that a GC is more memory >>> intensive. >> >> + Sometimes allocation and freeing of memory in an arbitrary >> unpredictable time unacceptable. (in game development or realtime >> software, for example. One hundred million times discussed about it >> there, I guess) > > Then use the stub GC or disable the GC, then re-enable it when > you have the time to run a sweep (yes, you can). > Then a memory overrun
> >> A need language that does not contain a GC (or contains optional). Many >> C++ programmers do not affect the D only because of this. > > While GC in D is not optional, it can be stubbed out or disabled, Then some part of the language will stop working (dynamic arrays, and possibly delegates) > and malloc/free used in its place. What more is it you ask for? I need an optional GC and complete freedom to use the stack.
