Maybe D is right about GC after all !

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Wednesday, January 03, 2018 19:03:20 Dan Partelly via Digitalmars-d 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 2 January 2018 at 01:07:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 02, 2018 00:34:57 Nerve via Digitalmars-d
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 at 09:54:05 UTC, Walter Bright
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > "C, Python, Go, and the Generalized Greenspun Law"
> >> >
> >> > http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7804
> >>
> >> I would simply add that the strongest vocalizations come from
> >> those with objections. The silent majority that is perfectly
> >> okay with GC and gets huge development complexity reductions
> >> thanks to it rarely spare the energy to argue againts the
> >> constant GC complaints.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > - Jonathan M Davis
>
> Really, would you expect that the strongest vocalizations should
> come from those with no objections ? (save for ESR's rant ? ). No
> need to answer.

The problem is that there are some very vocal folks who complain about the
GC, and then that often leads to folks thinking that there's a serious
problem with the fact that D has a GC, when arguably, that isn't true at
all. There are pros and cons to using a GC, there are some circumstances
where it's not appropriate, and we can do better to have it be optional
where appropriate, but in spite of what some of the vocal folks say, it has
been a big boon to D to have a GC, and it gets increasingly annoying to have
to deal with folks insisting that the GC should be excised from everywhere
and avoided as much as possible.

So, if no one speaks up about how it's actually great to have a GC, it
starts seeming like we all think that D shouldn't have a GC, which isn't the
case at all.

- Jonathan M Davis