On 1/8/2013 10:55 PM, Mehrdad wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 January 2013 at 22:19:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
One thing I'd add is that a GC is *required* if you want to have a language
that guarantees memory safety
Pardon? shared_ptr anyone? You can totally have a language that only provides
new/delete facilities and which only access to memory through managed pointers
like shared_ptr... without a GC. I don't see where a GC is "required" as you
say.
Reference counting is a valid form of GC.
C++'s shared_ptr, however, is both optional and allows access to the underlying
raw pointers. Hence, memory safety cannot be guaranteed.
