The "no gc" crowd

[Sean Kelly]

On Oct 8, 2013, at 3:38 PM, Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:

> On 10/8/2013 3:02 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:
>> You may argue that profiling won't always catch accidental allocations due to
>> test coverage. This is true, but then @nogc is only a partial fix to this
>> anyway. It will catch GC allocations, but what about accidental calls to malloc,
>> mmap, or maybe an accidental IO call due to some logging you forgot to remove.
>> GC allocations are just one class of performance problems, there are many more
>> and I hope we don't have to add attributes for them all.
> 
> This, of course, is the other problem with @nogc. Having a forest of attributes on otherwise ordinary functions is awfully ugly.

And we already have a forest of attributes on otherwise ordinary functions.