RFC: moving forward with @nogc Phobos

[Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 2 October 2014 at 20:10:42 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 October 2014 at 19:45:17 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
> Grøstad wrote:
>> But is sketchy on implementation details, semantic 
>> restrictions that follows and consequences when interacting 
>> with foreign code etc.
>
> Some Rust details. «sendable» means that a reference can be 
> transferred to another thread (or task/fiber/whatever).
>
> From http://doc.rust-lang.org/std/gc/ :
>
> «The Gc type provides shared ownership of an immutable value. 
> Destruction is not deterministic, and will occur some time 
> between every Gc handle being gone and the end of the task. The 
> garbage collector is task-local so Gc<T> is not sendable.»
>
> From http://doc.rust-lang.org/std/rc/index.html :
>
> «The Rc type provides shared ownership of an immutable value. 
> Destruction is deterministic, and will occur as soon as the 
> last owner is gone. It is marked as non-sendable because it 
> avoids the overhead of atomic reference counting.
>
> The downgrade method can be used to create a non-owning Weak 
> pointer to the box. A Weak pointer can be upgraded to an Rc 
> pointer, but will return None if the value has already been 
> freed.»
>
> So… they don't really solve the issues a @nogc version of D 
> should be able to deal with beyond having built-in unique_ptr 
> style semantics?
>
> Or?

The Gc type is gone as of this week.

https://github.com/rust-lang/meeting-minutes/blob/master/weekly-meetings/2014-09-30.md