Justin Johansson Wrote: > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > On 07/14/2010 01:15 AM, Kagamin wrote: > >> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > >> > >>> most GC's cannot provide efficient manual reclamation. And they > >>> shouldn't anyway. > >>> > >> If one doesn't want to implement a function, he can throw > >> NotImplementedException, or don't provide the function so that > >> program using the delete won't link. > > > > And how would you use such a feature effectively? I've seen such > > "optional implementation" policies in standards such as SQL > > (compatibility levels) and C++ (export). They _always_ fare disastrously. > > > >> But deallocation of allocated > >> memory is not that unthinkable just because it can be hard. > > > > It's not about difficulty as much as constraining GC implementers > > unnecessarily. Again: use a heap tuned for manual management to manage > > memory manually, and a heap tuned for automatic management to manage > > memory automatically. I think it's a very reasonable stance. > > > > > > Andrei > > "use a heap tuned for manual management to manage memory manually ..." > > So do I call in a piano tuner having both an ear for perfect pitch > and extreme programming skills at $blackmail per hour or do > I simply (knowledgeably) call in template meta-programming idioms for free? > > Justin
I don't comment here much because I don't really use D, and just follow this forum in my down time at work. However, occasionally I feel the need to post because I would like to see D succeed. (C++ is too error prone for much of the development it's used for.) This is one of those times. We use multiple all the time in gamedev with C++. In fact, if a language didn't support the ability to use multiple heaps tuned for different allocation strategies, it wouldn't be suitable.
