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

[IGotD-]

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

D did the serious mistake by having raw pointers in the default 
language (even in safe mode) rather than opaque references. This 
means that D cannot just as easily offer different GC algorithms 
like other languages.

If D would have opaque references then we would have seen more 
different GC types that would fit more needs.

D3 needs to happen so that we can correct these serious flaws.