Disable GC entirely

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 4/10/13 8:44 AM, Manu wrote:
> On 10 April 2013 22:37, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org <mailto:SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org>>
> wrote:
>
>     On 4/10/13 2:02 AM, Manu wrote:
>
>         I do use virtual functions, that's the point of classes. But most
>         functions are not virtual. More-so, most functions are trivial
>         accessors, which really shouldn't be virtual.
>
>
>     I'd say a valid style is to use free functions for non-virtual
>     methods. UFCS will take care of caller syntax.
>
>
> Valid, perhaps. But would you really recommend that design pattern?
> It seems a little obscure for no real reason. Breaks the feeling of the
> OO encapsulation principle somewhat.

It may as well be a mistake that nonvirtual functions are at all part of 
a class' methods. This has been quite painfully seen in C++ leading to 
surprising conclusions: http://goo.gl/dqZrr.

> I've started using UFCS more recently, but I'm still wary of overuse
> leading to unnecessary obscurity.

UFCS is a "slam dunk" feature - simple and immensely successful. The 
only bummer is that UFCS arrived to the scene late. If I designed D's 
classes today, I'd only allow overridable methods and leave everything 
else to free functions.


Andrei