On 23 April 2014 04:28, Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 14:12:17 -0400, Walter Bright > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 4/22/2014 6:18 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 19:02:53 -0400, Walter Bright >>> <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> The thing is, with iOS ARC, it cannot be statically guaranteed to be >>>> memory safe. >>> >>> >>> So? >> >> >> If you see no value in static guarantees of memory safety, then what can I >> say? > > > Seriously, the straw man arguments have to stop. > > There is plenty of valuable D code that is not guaranteed memory safe. For > example, druntime. > > ARC does not equal guaranteed memory safety. So NO, it cannot replace the GC > for D @safe code. That doesn't make it useless.
Why not? Assuming that direct access to the refcount is not @safe, why would ARC be unsafe? What makes it less safe than the GC?
