The "no gc" crowd

[ponce]

On Tuesday, 8 October 2013 at 16:22:25 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> It is not overblown. It is simply "@nogc" which is lacking but 
> absolutely mandatory. Amount of hidden language allocations 
> makes manually cleaning code of those via runtime asserts 
> completely unreasonable for real project.

Hidden language allocations:
- concatenation operator   ~
- homogeneous arguments   void (T[]... args)
- "real" closures that escapes
- array literals
- some phobos calls

What else am I missing?
I don't see the big problem, and a small fraction of projects 
will require a complete ban on GC allocation, right?