[Off-Topic] John Carmack's point of view on GC and languages like JavaScript

[Nicholas Wilson]

On Sunday, 7 August 2022 at 20:48:02 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 August 2022 at 20:43:32 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:
>> That's kinda bullshit, it depends on the GC implementation
>>
>> D's GC is not good for 99.99% "of all software in the world", 
>> it's wrong to say this, and is misleading
>>
>> Java's ones are, because they offer multiple implementations 
>> that you can configure and the, they cover a wide range of use 
>> cases
>>
>> D's GC is not the panacea, it's nice to have, but it's not 
>> something to brag about, specially when it STILL stop the 
>> world during collection, and is STILL not scalable
>>
>> Go did it right by focusing on low latency, and parallelism, 
>> we should copy their GC
>
> What we should promote more about D is the fact that
>
> "GC is here when you need it, but you can also go raw when you 
> need it, pragmatism allows D to be used for 99.9% of 
> traditional softwares, but is also suitable for the remaining 
> 0.1%"
>
> And not just "We have a GC too, who needs to manage memory 
> manually LOL"

You seem to be unaware that D does have more than one GC 
available.
Specifically, there is a fork based GC available for linux that 
is not stop-the-world, and is usable fro real time applications.

Perhaps we should advertise that more. Its only real downside is 
that it is linux only.