Bottom line re GC in D

[Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d]

Am 10.07.2014 21:57, schrieb deadalnix:
> On Wednesday, 9 July 2014 at 11:21:13 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>> Adrian:
>>
>>> As for your second question (i.e. how good the GC needs to be for
>>> me), I would probably be satisfied with a GC that matches the Java one
>>
>> This will not happen even in one hundred years. So if that's what you
>> want, you will never be satisfied by D GC.
>>
>
> Actually, I think we can do better than Java, because we have
> type qualifiers and less indirection. That isn't unseen: OCaml's
> GC is more performant than Java's. We certainly do not have the
> resources java has, but we have a language that is way more GC
> friendly.

I agree, given the research OS implemented in GC enabled systems languages.

Sadly I cannot speak for more than Oberon and AOS as experience.

--
Paulo