More radical ideas about gc and reference counting

[Wyatt via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 6 May 2014 at 06:39:45 UTC, Manu via Digitalmars-d 
wrote:
>
> The Obj-C thing as an example. Granted, it's a huge feature and
> has extensive implications. The Authors have said themselves
> that they agree it's not 'ready' for inclusion... so, what? It
> sits and rots?  I think it needs an experimental place to live
> and have people make use of it for what it is.

This bit right here reminds me of something the Linux kernel has 
called "staging" [1].  It's basically what you describe: a 
subtree within main source tree for things to be publicly 
available while they finish baking, with the understanding that 
you're going to continue working on it and hopefully get it 
promoted to first-class citizen.

> I'm plenty vocal and active on things I do feel I know about,
> but they're often pretty radical, unpopular, and rarely come
> even close to turning into code. I'm pretty certain that nothing
> left on my short list that I personally *really* care about will
> ever get pulled, even if I did do the work.

I know I and several other people are still interested in 
std.simd... :(

-Wyatt

[1] http://lwn.net/Articles/324279/