:)) how true
On Friday, 18 July 2014 at 14:25:54 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Friday, 18 July 2014 at 13:53:14 UTC, Dominikus Dittes
Scherkl wrote:
On Friday, 18 July 2014 at 13:17:34 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 18:13:18 UTC, Frustrated wrote:
Are those that say the GC is fine and works for 90-95% of
apps without issue just ignorant? Or are they arrogant?
When one is writing a real time app and have the absolute
lowest chance of losing control, a STW GC is simply not
allowed in this apps.
D works fine without GC for me. What problems do you have?
For me also.
The cool thing about D is:
You can use it like a script-language at first, and GC (+all
the other nice features like unit tests, asserts etc) keep you
from bothering with stupit bugs and implementation details
that are only relevant for maximum performance.
And afterwards, if it comes to RT (real-time), the first thing
I throw out is all that MMI stuff (man-machine-interface),
e.g. everything dealing with strings. And thats about 98% of
all functions that use GC in my code. The very little rest is
things like exceptions, delegates and closures - because I
have no idea how to use them with manual memory management. So
unfortunately I have to avoid them in RT code.
But what remains is anyway far, far, better than what C
offered. And to make that clear: nothing else was usable for
embedded programming before D. No C++, no Java, nothing at all.
Ada and Modula-2?
