Maybe D is right about GC after all !

[Laeeth Isharc]

On Wednesday, 27 December 2017 at 16:29:02 UTC, Russel Winder 
wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-12-27 at 02:13 -0800, Walter Bright via 
> Digitalmars-d
> wrote:
> […]
>> 
>> Builtin unittests and Ddoc, for example. There's a big 
>> psychological
>> advantage
>> to having them built in rather than requiring an external 
>> tool. The
>> closeness to
>> C syntax is no accident, for another.
>> 
>> I've been in the compiler biz since the early 80s, working with
>> customers, doing
>> tech support. That results in experience in what works for 
>> people and
>> what
>> doesn't, even if it is not scientific or better from a CS 
>> point of
>> view.
>
> This does not support the original claim that the design of D 
> by you is based on psychology. It may be based on your 
> perception of other programmers needs, which is fine per se, 
> but that is not psychology- based design.

That's like saying the way George Soros trades is not based on 
psychology because he doesn't refer to the literature in making 
and articulating his decision-making process.  Instead people 
write papers about how he thinks, because it's not yet in the 
literature!

If published knowledge were what was most important or valuable 
then anyone intelligent with an interest in a subject would be 
part of a war of all against all, because how is it possible to 
have an edge?  But I don't think human expertise can be described 
in that manner.  Karl Polanyi's work is quite interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacit_knowledge