C's Biggest Mistake on Hacker News

[bpr]

On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 17:24:41 UTC, Seb wrote:
> On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 17:14:53 UTC, Chris M. wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 16:15:52 UTC, bpr wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 24 July 2018 at 14:07:43 UTC, Ecstatic Coder 
>>> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> No. For many C++ users, tracing GC is absolutely not an 
>>> option. And, if it were, D's GC is not a shining example of a 
>>> good GC. It's not even precise, and I would bet that it never 
>>> will be. If I'm able to tolerate a GC, there are languages 
>>> with much better GCs than the D one, like Go and Java.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> There was a precise GC in the works at one point, no clue what 
>> happened to it.
>
> The newest PR is:
>
> https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/1977
>
> Though there's already a bit of precise scanning on Windows, 
> e.g. https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/1798 and IIRC 
> Visual D uses a precise GC too.

Well, this is a big problem with D IMO. There are a lot of 
unfinished, half baked features which linger in development for 
years. How long for precise GC now, over 5 years? I don't think D 
was really designed to be friendly to GC, and it just isn't 
realistic to expect that there will *ever* be a production 
quality precise GC for all of D. Maybe giving up on some things 
and finishing/fixing others would be a better strategy? I think 
so, which is why I think DasBetterC is the most appealing thing 
I've seen in D lately.