Isn't it about time for D3?

[Wulfklaue via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 15 June 2017 at 15:04:26 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> Should D really move to GC-free? I think there is already 
> enough GC-free language on the market. D even now is very 
> complected language, and adding ways to manually managing 
> memory will make it's more complicated.
>
> A lot of people need more powerful static-typing alternative to 
> Python/C# for common tasks that allow to build stand-alone 
> executable files.
>
> I think it's bad idea to mix to paradigms. People who do not 
> need GC at all already use Rust.

Actually, D already supports GC-Free / manual memory management.

https://dlang.org/phobos/std_experimental_allocator.html
+
@nogc
= manual memory management

The issue is that the std library is still full of GC parts and 
so is third party software. But you can simply turn functions and 
classes that do not use the library / 3th party software into 
pure nogc parts. Think of it more as a hybridize system.

I think there is somebody here who was writing a non-gc library 
for D.