Future of D 2.x as stable/bug fix, and what's next for D 3.x

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Wednesday, 2 September 2020 at 08:40:27 UTC, Russel Winder 
wrote:
> And D without garbage collection would create a pool of ex-D 
> programmers saying "if only D had stuck to it's guns with 
> garbage collection instead of being bullied into a position by 
> C++ and Rust lovers who aren't going to use D anyway."

Yes.

But there is a difference between 1) having an ecosystem where 
many libraries and frameworks rely on stop-the-world-GC 2) having 
the option of using GC in application code (or maybe just in unit 
tests).

It is possible to market a low-level programming GC strategy, if 
it is geared towards that specific use scenario.

Especially if you consider mixed use, e.g. where the application 
use GC during initialization. But in those cases you might want 
the gaps on the GC heap to be available for malloc, or run 
compaction after initialization.

Or just to have GC available for testing frameworks.