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