Conspiracy Theory #1

[dsimcha]

== Quote from Travis Boucher (boucher.travis at gmail.com)'s article
> dsimcha wrote:
> > == Quote from Travis Boucher (boucher.travis at gmail.com)'s article
> >> Sean Kelly wrote:
> >>  Its harder
> >> to create a memory leak in D then it is to prevent one in C.
> >
> > void doStuff() {
> >     uint[] foo = new uint[100_000_000];
> > }
> >
> > void main() {
> >     while(true) {
> >         doStuff();
> >     }
> > }
> >
> Hmm, that seems like that should be an implementation bug.  Shouldn't
> foo be marked for GC once it scope?  (I have never used new on a
> primitive type, so I don't know)

It's conservative GC.  D's GC, along with the Hans Boehm GC and probably most GCs
for close to the metal languages, can't perfectly identify what's a pointer and
what's not.  Therefore, for sufficiently large allocations there's a high
probability that some bit pattern that looks like a pointer but isn't one will
keep the allocation alive long after there are no "real" references to it left.