On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Mehrdad wrote: > On Thursday, 4 July 2013 at 21:11:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: [...] > >My point was that it's perfectly possible to write C++ code which > >uses a GC, not that it was normal or easy. > > No, the point is that it would only with a particular C++ compiler. > It's not "C++" code if a C++ compiler can't run it correctly. That > would make it "a vendor-specific language similar to C++" code.
Really? I thought there are conservative GC's out there for C++ (and even C, IIRC). It's not too much different from D's GC, actually. You just override malloc/free in the library (or operator new and operator delete, as the case may be), then have a GC thread scan the runtime stack for roots. Of course, only a conservative GC is possible, since you don't know what's a real pointer and what's just an integer value that happens to look like a pointer. But it's definitely possible. T -- Без труда не выловишь и рыбку из пруда.
