On Saturday, 1 February 2014 at 09:27:18 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
For the vast majority of use cases, a GC is the right call and D has to cater to the majority if it wants to gain any significant mindshare at all. You don't grow by increasing specialization...
So catering to the C++ crowd who shun Java and C# not so much for JITing their code but precisely for their forced use of a GC is a "minority" issue then? Again, please take those of us more serious who don't like a GC to interfere with their business and if it's only for "programming hygiene" reasons. As you consider handling low latency requirements undue "specialisation" anyways.
On Saturday, 1 February 2014 at 12:04:56 UTC, JR wrote:
To my uneducated eyes, an ARC collector does seem like the near-ideal solution
ARC would be a plus for heavily interdependent code. But it doesn't beat unique_ptr semantics in local use that free their memory immediately as they go out of scope or are reassigned.
I would *dearly* love to have concurrency in whatever we end up with, though. For a multi-core personal computer threads are free lunches, or close enough so.
No they are not. I want to make good use of all the cores I have available and I don't want to share them a bit with the GC. It's myyy ... precious.
As you may have guessed, my criticism is harsh because I love the language :)
