John Carmack applauds D's pure attribute

Peter Alexander peter.alexander.au at gmail.com
Sat Feb 25 14:17:38 PST 2012


On Saturday, 25 February 2012 at 22:08:31 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> Am 25.02.2012 21:26, schrieb Peter Alexander:
>> On Saturday, 25 February 2012 at 20:13:42 UTC, so wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 25 February 2012 at 18:47:12 UTC, Nick 
>>> Sabalausky wrote:
>>>
>>>> Interesting. I wish he'd elaborate on why it's not an option 
>>>> for his
>>>> daily
>>>> work.
>>>
>>> Not the design but the implementation, memory management 
>>> would be the
>>> first.
>>
>> Memory management is not a problem. You can manage memory just 
>> as easily
>> in D as you can in C or C++. Just don't use global new, which 
>> they'll
>> already be doing.
>
> I couldn't agree more.
>
> The GC issue comes around often, but I personally think that 
> the main
> issue is that the GC needs to be optimized, not that manual 
> memory management is required.
>
> Most standard compiler malloc()/free() implementations are 
> actually slower than most advanced GC algorithms.

If you require realtime performance then you don't use either the 
GC or malloc/free. You allocate blocks up front and use those 
when you need consistent high performance.

It doesn't matter how optimised the GC is. The eventual 
collection is inevitable and if it takes anything more than a 
small fraction of a second then it will be too slow for realtime 
use.



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list