low-latency GC

Ola Fosheim Grostad ola.fosheim.grostad at gmail.com
Sun Dec 6 18:12:43 UTC 2020


On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 17:28:52 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
> D is good for systems level work but that's not all.  I use it 
> for projects where, in the past, I'd have split the work 
> between two languages (Python and C/C++).  I much prefer 
> working with a single language that spans the problem space.

My impression from reading the forums is that people either use D 
as a replacement for C/C++ or Python/numpy, so I think your 
experience covers the essential use case scenario that is 
dominating current D usage? Any improvements have to improve both 
dimension, I agree.

> If there is a way to extend D's reach with zero or a near-zero 
> complexity increase as seen by the programmer, I believe we 
> should (as/when resources allow of course).

ARC involves a complexity increase, to some extent. Library 
authors have to think a bit more principled about when objects 
should be phased out and destructed, which I think tend to lead 
to better programs. It would also allow for faster precise 
collection. So it could be beneficial for all.



More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list