On Wednesday, 16 April 2014 at 03:16:34 UTC, froglegs wrote:
I know it does, but users employing @nogc still have to manage
memory somehow. Let's add hooks to the runtime and implement
some GC alternatives, and then see what demand is like ;-)
They use noGC and smart pointers/manual ala C++.
Yes, and they would have to forego many of D's features that do
implicit allocations (dynamic arrays, exceptions, etc...) and
implement alternatives.
If the right hooks and corresponding logic were added to the
runtime, users could potentially implement memory management
alternatives, including some which more closely mimic that of
C++, and still be able to employ those features.
You seem to be suggesting that people who don't want GC,
actually secretly want GC. Just to let you know, that isn't the
case.
No, I'm not. I'm suggesting people who say they don't want GC
want an alternative way to manage memory. So I suggest adding
runtime hooks that would enable us to build alternatives.
