Exceptions in @nogc code

[Nick B via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 2 April 2017 at 21:27:07 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Saturday, 1 April 2017 at 22:08:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 4/1/2017 7:54 AM, deadalnix wrote:
>>> It doesn't need any kind of throw new scope Exception, and 
>>> was proposed,
>>> literally, years ago during discussion around DIP25 and alike.
>>
>> A link to that proposal would be appreciated.
>
> The forum search isn't returning anything useful so I'm not 
> sure how to get that link. However, it goes roughly as follow. 
> Note that it's a solution to solve DIP25+DIP1000+RC+nogc 
> exception and a sludge of other issues, and that comparing it 
> to any of these independently will yield the obvious it is more 
> complex. But that wouldn't be a fair comparison, as one should 
> compare it to the sum of all these proposals, not to any of 
> them independently.
>
[snip]
>
> This mechanism solves numerous other issues. Notably and non 
> exhaustively:
>  - General reduction in the amount of garbage created.
>  - Ability to transfers ownership of data between thread safely 
> (without cast to/from shared).
>  - Safe std.parralelism.
>  - Elaborate construction of shared and immutable objects.
>  - Safe reference counting.
>  - Safe "arena" style reference counting such as: 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfmTagWcqoE
>  - Solves problems with collection ownership and alike.

This silence is killing me!

Can one assume that Walter is thinking about deadalnix's detailed 
proposal above, and that he will give a formal response, once he 
has given it serious thought, and discussed it with Andrei ?

cheers Nick