So what exactly is coming with extended C++ support?

[Cliff via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 30 September 2014 at 21:19:44 UTC, Ethan wrote:
>
> Hello. AAA developer (Remedy) here using D. Custom tech, with a 
> custom binding solution written originally by Manu and 
> continued by myself.
>
> A GC itself is not a bad thing. The implementation, however, is.
>
> With a codebase like ours (mostly C++, some D), there's a few 
> things we need. Deterministic garbage collection is a big one - 
> when our C++ object is being destroyed, we need the D object to 
> be destroyed at the same time in most cases. This can be 
> handled by calling GC.collect() often, but that's where the 
> next thing comes in - the time the GC needs. If the time isn't 
> being scheduled at object destruction, then it all gets lumped 
> together in the GC collect. It automatically moves the time 
> cost to a place where we may not want it.

Not a GC specialist here, so maybe the thought arises - why not
turn off automatic GC until such times in the code where you can
afford the cost of it, then call GC.collect explicitly -
essentially eliminating the opportunity for the GC to run at
random times and force running at deterministic times?  Is memory
usage so constrained that failing to execute runs in-between
those deterministic blocks could lead to OOM?  Does such a
strategy have other nasty side-effects which make it impractical?