On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 17:03:58 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:56:31 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
ooh better last sentence
D's GC implementation follows in the footsteps of industry
giants without compromising experts' ability to realize
maximum potential from the machine.
If D had a decent garbage collector it might be a more
convincing argument. If going malloc didnt lose you a bunch of
features and bring a bunch of other stuff you need to be
careful of, that might be a good argument too.
I mean a good quality GC and seamless integration of manual
memory management would be a pretty good argument to make, but
D has neither of those ATM.
What are D's limitations on do-it-yourself reference counting?