GCs in the news

H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Jul 17 10:47:45 PDT 2014


On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 05:28:01PM +0000, Vic via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:13:04 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
> >On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 16:56:56 UTC, Vic wrote:
> >>If GC is so good, why not make it an option, have a base lib w/o GC.
> >
> >Much of Phobos already is GC free. The parts that aren't should be
> >easy to convert to use user-supplied buffers. Please add enhancement
> >requests for cases where there isn't a GC-free alternative to a
> >standard library routine.
> 
> If that is true, I may even do a $ bounty to make Phobos GC free.
> 
> I may do the same, $ bounty on vibe.d port to GC free.
> 
> I don't know D enough to be able to do that, but good news to me.
[...]

Over the last year or so, IIRC, there has been a push (a slow but
nonetheless steady push) to make as much of Phobos GC-free as possible.
I'd say most (all?) of std.algorithm and std.range should be GC-free by
now, and probably many of the others can be made GC-free quite easily
with the tools that we now have.

AFAIK some work still needs to be done with std.string; Walter for one
has started some work to implement range-based equivalents for
std.string functions, which would be non-allocating; we just need a bit
of work to push things through.

DMD 2.066 will have @nogc, which will make it easy to discover which
remaining parts of Phobos are still not GC-free. Then we'll know where
to direct our efforts. :-)


T

-- 
Elegant or ugly code as well as fine or rude sentences have something in
common: they don't depend on the language. -- Luca De Vitis


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list