Talk on what a systems programming language needs to replace C

H. S. Teoh hsteoh at
Thu Sep 5 20:21:12 UTC 2019

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 07:33:05PM +0000, bachmeier via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> It's true that Rust does appeal to the sliver of programmers that
> think memory management is an awesome way to spend Saturday night, but
> let's let Rust have those users and worry about a good experience for
> the rest.

+1, couldn't have said it better.  Coming from a C/C++ background, I'm
well-versed in all-nighters spent debugging memory management problems,
and personally I find D's GC a godsend.  I am *so* much more productive
with the GC when performance isn't a big issue, and even when it is,
there are ways to control the GC so that it stays out of the bottlenecks
in the code.  It isn't as though this is Java where you are *forced* to
use the GC, after all.  (In many cases the GC isn't a problem as long as
you don't trigger it inside performance-sensitive inner loops.  Cutting
out GC from the *entire* application as a knee-jerk reaction is, IMNSHO,
premature optimization. Heck, even game engines these days support
higher-level scripting in GC'd languages -- you just have to keep the GC
out of the core performance sensitive code and it's Good Enough(tm).)

> > There's still room in the world for DasBetterC, so I hope the
> > development continues. It's great that many of the annoying
> > restrictions have been lifted.
> Exactly. There's no reason to choose between D and betterC because we
> can have both.



Designer clothes: how to cover less by paying more.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list