Disallowing the creation of objects using new should have default object functions and parent functions be @nogc by definition.

[Basile B.]

On Saturday, 17 March 2018 at 13:30:25 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> It makes no sense otherwise. This logically implies that manual 
> memory management is required, yet there is a possibility that 
> the parent of the class may use the garbage collection. Which 
> in this case, it begs the question on why the GC is forbid in 
> the first place.
>
> Does anyone dispute this?

No, it's even required. Mixing GC and non-GC is a known source of 
memory errors, but rather in the opposite way that the one you 
describe. Errors happen when non-GC instances has GC-managed 
members.

To be consistent on this point there are templates like in the 
Containers library (ShouldAddGcRange) or like in IZ 
(MustAddGcRange). The latter is inspired by the first and is 
enhanced with a system of UDA (@NoGc). Also compilation can be 
stopped if by error a GC-managed field is found.

After developing this in IZ, many memory problems i had in KHEOPS 
suddenly disappeared and a kind of animated 2D scene started to 
run for hours without disappearing elements (previously a GC 
collection was causing this).

Enriched by this experience i can confirm that there's nothing to 
dispute at all.
You're 100% correct.