Bottom line re GC in D

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 07:57:55PM +0000, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
> 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.

Are you sure about that? Having unions, pointer arithmetic, and passing
things to/from C/C++ constrains possible GC implementations more than in
Java, where you don't have to worry about such things. Although we'd
like to default to @safe, we aren't quite there yet, and besides, you
don't want to have a GC that only works in @safe code when obviously
there's a lot of D code out there that is un- at safe.


T

-- 
Real men don't take backups. They put their source on a public FTP-server and let the world mirror it. -- Linus Torvalds