On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 23:27:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:55:09 UTC, JN wrote:
Citation needed on how garbage collection has been a smashing
success based on its merits rather than the merits of the
languages that use garbage collection.
Who cares? Even if the success isn't because of GC per se, the
ubiquity of it in the real world means it certainly isn't a
deal breaker.
GC is all about time/space tradeoffs. That's all one can say
about it really.
Yes, the 'ubiquity of it in the real world' (in popular and not
so popular languages) suggest that most accept this tradeoff, in
favour of using GC.
But many still don't..
And many that do, might decide otherwise in the future... cause
I'm not sure how well GC really scales...(in the future, the size
of the heap might be terabytes..or more).
That's not an argument for not defaulting to GC in D.
It's an argument for when GC in D, could be a deal breaker.
So it's good thing for the D community to consider these people
as well - rather than saying 'who cares'.
In the end, GC just adds to all the other bloat that's associated
with programming in the modern era. The more we can reduce bloat,
the -betterD.
I'm glad there is alot of research in this area, and increasingly
so - that's really important, cause the story of automatic memory
management is far from over - even in D it seems.
