new D2.0 + C++ language

[Weed]

BCS пишет:
> Reply to Weed,
> 
>> If you know the
>> best way for language *without GC* guaranteeing the existence of an
>> object without overhead - I have to listen!
>>
> 
> Never delete anything?
> 
> One of the arguments for GC is that it might well have /less/ overhead
> than any other practical way of managing dynamic memory.

Mmm
When I say "overhead" I mean the cost of executions, and not cost of
programming

> Yes you can be
> very careful in keeping track of pointers (not practical) or use smart
> pointers and such (might end up costing more than GC)

I am do not agree: GC overexpenditure CPU or memory. Typically, both.


> but neither is
> particularly nice.