Go's march to low-latency GC

[The D dude via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 16 July 2016 at 11:02:00 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 July 2016 at 10:58:47 UTC, Istvan Dobos wrote:
>>  I was thinking, okay, so D's GC seems to turned out not that 
>> great. But how about the idea of transplanting Rust's 
>> ownership system instead of trying to make the GC better?
>
> This requires drastically changing 99% of the language and it's 
> bringing not just the benefits but also all the pain coming 
> with this ownership system. Productivity goes down, learning 
> curve goes up. And it will be a very different language in the 
> end, so you might want to just use Rust instead of trying to 
> make D another Rust.

Yes that's the case for Rust, but no one has proven yet that an 
ownership system needs to such a pain.

In fact someone recently proposed an idea for a readable 
ownership system:

http://forum.dlang.org/post/ensdiijttlpcwuhdfpuu@forum.dlang.org

and I believe that it's quite possible to improve over Rust and 
still having a productive language. In fact the simple `scope` 
statements are a first and excellent step on this journey ;-)