Social media

[Paulo Pinto]

On Sunday, 14 June 2020 at 00:47:08 UTC, Avrina wrote:
> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 at 19:08:17 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 at 16:39:16 UTC, Avrina wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 at 14:43:22 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 at 13:11:20 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, 13 June 2020 at 13:00:35 UTC, JN wrote:
>>>>>> There is always someone saying that you don't have to use 
>>>>>> GC in D
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, this is true and for special cases we can show users 
>>>>> how it is done, but I wish we'd just focus on actually 
>>>>> selling GC instead of hiding from it.
>>>>>
>>>>> GC is a proven winner in real world industry programming 
>>>>> and is one of D's strengths. Why we constantly shoot 
>>>>> ourselves in the foot by conceding this ground to internet 
>>>>> trolls is beyond me.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, even hard core C++ devs that happen to work with 
>>>> Unreal, UWP/COM or DriverKit have to make peace with GC 
>>>> technologies (either tracing or refcounted).
>>>
>>> I've heard heard the Unreal argument before. That's not the 
>>> same thing as a GC in a programming language. You wouldn't be 
>>> able to build the GC built in Unreal in a GC only language. 
>>> You are using it as an example to use the GC but in reality 
>>> it demonstrates the need for programming languages that 
>>> doesn't force you to use one.
>>
>> Sure it is, Blueprints and Unreal C++ (as C++ dialect used in 
>> Unreal) have GC support.
>
> You are using a strawman argument, people that don't like GC 
> for *systems* programming aren't against *all* GCs.
>
>> And apparently everyone keeps forgetting that C++11 has gotten 
>> a GC API, while a couple of dialects like C++/CLI and C++/CX 
>> also have GC extensions.
>
> That no one uses. C++/CLI is dead. C++/CX is dead. There's 
> C++/WinRT which is dying and being replaced by Rust :). You are 
> just giving reasons against a GC, no one liked using C++/CLI or 
> C++/CX.

C++/CLI is so much dead that is was the major roadmap bullet 
point for getting .NET Core 3.0 out of the door.

Plenty of Windows developers love C++/CX, in fact the game is 
still out there regarding C++/WinRT adoption, and the only thing 
it going for it is the forced adoption via WinUI.

Which with Project Reunion's admission of UWP failure, it still 
remains to be seen if any major group of Windows developers 
actually cares about C++/WinRT, or will continue to use MFC and 
.NET Forms/WPF instead as always.

As for Rust replacing C++, C++/WinRT and Rust/WinRT are children 
of the same author, C++/WinRT still fails to match C++/CX tooling 
to this day, while Rust/WinRT barely left the design board.