Why are the nogc crowed labeled as alarmists?!?!

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 20:52:15 UTC, Hannes Steffenhagen 
wrote:
> Last time I checked, D was advertised as a systems programming 
> language and a real alternative to C/C++. I think we're good 
> for languages that cover the needs of web application 
> developers, that 5% is where most people interested in D would 
> be coming from.
>
> Not that the web application thing is even entirely true; If 
> you have huge workloads you'll eventually want to take more 
> control than managed systems give you.

And with recent work in LDC and GDC it D is quite capable of it, 
what Mike DConf talk brilliantly proves. You may even use some 
parts of Phobos with help of @nogc! There are certain parts of 
the language that trigger GC when it is entirely possible to 
avoid that and we should fight those with no doubt. But that does 
not mean removing GC from the core language.

And for any kind of web applications GC is not a problem if it is 
concurrent GC (which is something to improve but unrelated to "GC 
is evil" topic). Just the fact that your application _may_ 
generate a lot of garbage does not mean you have to do it. Use 
custom allocators for most data and experience something Java 
can't give you.

Now if you want to have _both_ automatic memory management _and_ 
removal of GC there will be some trouble. But it is something 
that C/C++ can't give you either so mentioning it as a transition 
blocker is hardly a good point.

Right now D is probably about 20% behind C++ feature-wise for 
RAII / manual memory management coding style and this gap is 
compensated with templates alone. After GDC (or was it LDC?) get 
planned switches to remove RTTI related stuff I'd honestly 
recommend anyone doing low-level project to give it a try.