More radical ideas about gc and reference counting

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 2 May 2014 at 20:59:46 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
> Yeah, you have to read the "fine print": "collection implies 
> destruction" *but* "no guarantees the collection will actually 
> ever happen".

Which make destructors dangerous constructs. It means you now 
risk getting random bugs-reports after deployment. Acceptable for 
a hobby language, not acceptable for a systems programming 
language.