The "no gc" crowd

[Sean Kelly]

On Oct 9, 2013, at 11:34 PM, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:

> On 2013-10-10 02:22, Sean Kelly wrote:
> 
>> Only that this would have to be communicated to the user, since moving data later is problematic. Today, I think it's common to construct an object as unshared and then cast it.
> 
> What is the reason to not create it as "shared" in the first place?

The same as immutable--you may not have all the shared functions available to establish the desired state.  But I'll grant that this is obviously way more common with immutable than shared.