Am Sun, 04 Oct 2015 23:28:47 +0000 schrieb Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com>:
> On Sunday, 4 October 2015 at 21:41:00 UTC, rsw0x wrote: > > If D has no intentions of aiding the GC, then the GC should > > just be dropped because it's basically just slapping Boehm on > > C++ right now. > > I don't understand this attitude at all (and you're not the only > one to voice it lately). D has a ton to offer and so little of it > has anything to do with the GC. The delegate/lambda/closure > situation is generally saner thanks to the GC (at least as far as > safety goes), and arrays have some fantastic features thanks to > the GC, but D has _way_ more to offer than that, and most of it > has nothing to do with the GC. D's templates alone blow C++ > totally out of the water. C++ is a great language, and I love it. > But at this point, I only use it when I have to. D is just _so_ > much more pleasant to program in that I have no interest in > programming in C++ anymore. It's been years since I've done any > kind of pet project in C++. > > - Jonathan M Davis It was probably bad wording. I understood it as D's GC works on a similar basis as Boehm now - conservative, stop the world mark & sweep. The reason in both being the nature of the host language. In fact the German Wikipedia says that Boehm GC was ported with minimal changes to druntime. -- Marco
