A betterC base

[Dave Jones]

On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 14:56:31 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> ooh better last sentence
>
>
> D's GC implementation follows in the footsteps of industry 
> giants without compromising experts' ability to realize maximum 
> potential from the machine.

If D had a decent garbage collector it might be a more convincing 
argument. If going malloc didnt lose you a bunch of features and 
bring a bunch of other stuff you need to be careful of, that 
might be a good argument too.

I mean a good quality GC and seamless integration of manual 
memory management would be a pretty good argument to make, but D 
has neither of those ATM.