GC has a "barbaric" destroyng model, I think

[Andrey Derzhavin via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Thursday, 12 February 2015 at 12:29:47 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:

> Exactly. That's why it's wrong to rely on the GC if you need 
> deterministic resource management. It's simply the wrong tool 
> for that.
>
> Unfortunately, the "right" tools are a bit awkward to use, for 
> the time being. I still have hopes that we can finally get our 
> act together and get a usable `scope` implementation, which can 
> then be used to provide better library defined container types  
> as well as efficient reference counting.

If we can't relay on GC wholly, there is no need for GC.
All of the objects, that I can create, I can destroy manually by 
myself, without any doubtful GC destroying attempts.