Plan for D

[Mike Parker]

On Sunday, 16 May 2021 at 06:44:09 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:

>
> If this is difficult to accept, then there is no hope of 
> improvements.

This has nothing to do with D. The C version of the D compiler 
also did not release memory. He has written in these forums about 
why he made that decision, and it has absolutely nothing to do 
with memory management options in any language. It was a 
conscious decision to pay for faster compile times with increased 
memory usage.

If you think that's a bad decision, fine. But you're flat out 
wrong that it says anything about D.


> If GC is suitable for anything system level, it would be a 
> batch program like a compiler.

And no one says it isn't. That Walter chose not to use the GC 
says nothing at all about its suitability for compilers. Of 
course someone who decided the cost of free is too high would 
choose not to use the GC!

Someone who is not Walter might choose to take the hit on compile 
times to pay for the benefits of the GC. Then, of course, they 
would write their code with that in mind and optimize it for GC 
usage. D gives them the choice to make the right decision for 
their specific use case to meet their specific goals.

You're extrapolating a broad point from a single example based on 
a flawed interpretation.