Future of memory management in D
Ola Fosheim Grøstad
ola.fosheim.grostad at gmail.com
Wed Nov 17 23:18:08 UTC 2021
On Wednesday, 17 November 2021 at 23:01:44 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
> That isn't not what happened, people did demand @nogc back
> before it existed and considered it necessary. (I was a sceptic
> and am now an avid user of @nogc).
I am sorry if my memory is off, but I thought people suggested a
command-line switch for nogc and that Walter came up with the
idea for the attribute. I could be wrong as this is ten years
ago! I never thought it was essential, let me put it that way. I
thought it was a nice feature that confirmed that Walter *wants*
programmers to view D as proper system programming language.
Which is significant to what could happen down the road, but not
a replacement for compiler backed no-gc memory management.
> GC in D did receive many improvements over the years: @nogc,
> speed and space enhancements, -profile=gc... A bit surprised by
> the disinformation on this thread.
There has been many improvements, but that does not change the
O(N) limitation and the fact that it essentially is a
Boehm-collector like C++ has. Almost no projects use that one.
And that says a lot of what system level programmers look for.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list