On 5/11/2014 8:44 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
As long as C++/CX and O-C are brought out here as proven, successful examples
for D to emulate here, and there is no acknowledgement that they are not
remotely memory safe, I need to continue to point this out.
You should not say that ARC is not safe then, you should say instead that ARC in
those languages has to be supplemented with unsafe code to be fast enough.
And I did, probably at least a dozen times in this thread, including quotes you
replied to specifically: "Again, O-C and C++/CX ARC are not memory safe because
in order to make it perform they provide unsafe escapes from it."
I don't know how I could be clearer.
In the spirit of being clear, I am opposed to any replacement for the GC that:
1. makes it impossible to meet or exceed C++ performance levels
2. is not memory safe
3. implies shipping multiple builds of Phobos, each using a different memory
management scheme
I am not opposed to ARC as a supplement, even if it is @system only, in
particular one that can interact with O-C.
