Will the D GC be awesome?

[Peter Alexander]

On Wednesday, 3 October 2012 at 21:31:52 UTC, 
DypthroposTheImposter wrote:
>  But can the D GC ever be made:
>
> 1. precise
> 2. able to scale to large-ish data set(2gig+)
> 3. No long stalls(anything over a couple millisecond(<3))
>
> Q. Curious, would it be compacting?

I believe all these things are being worked on, or at least 
planned.


> Which leaves me with structs, and lets just say D struct are 
> not impressive--

Why?


> * Oh and on a totally unrelated note, D needs Multiple return 
> values. Lua has it, it's awesome. D doesn't want to be left out 
> does it?

It doesn't need them, but it might be nice. In the meantime you 
can use out params.


> * OpCmp returning an int is fugly I r sad

Maybe, but it does make things easier to implement.


> * why is haskell so much shorter syntax, can D get that nice 
> syntax plssssssssss

Using C-family syntax makes D feel more at home to C/C++/Java/C# 
programmers. A lot of people are scared off by Haskell's syntax 
because it is so unusual.