Spellechecker - is this really fun?

[Walter Bright]

Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:
> Nor do I agree with this one. I have recently tried to achieve good
> performance with Qt's string handling and really wished that I used D.
> Phobos(and Tango) algorithms work with all kind of strings(mutable and
> immutable, UTF-8,16,32) and you don't allocate each time when you extract a
> sub-string. So D would actually be faster in what I was doing.

Often, people will compare garbage collection with explicit allocation by using 
code that does an equal number of allocations for each. GC often comes off 
looking worse from this perspective.

But, having a GC enables a program to do a lot fewer allocations (for several 
reasons, one of which you mention) and this can lead GC to be an overall win. 
But you gotta change the algorithm to take advantage of GC.