Incremental garbage collection

[IGotD-]

On Friday, 21 January 2022 at 02:17:34 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
>
> This is clearly an area where anecdotals like "Walter will 
> never accept this" aren't useful.  There's ample evidence to 
> show that he accepts when he's proven wrong.
>
> To make any progress towards a better GC it's going to have to 
> be demonstrated.  And the proof will justify the changes.  If 
> they're good and the complexities required to get there aren't 
> awful, then they'll make into the code base.  If they're not, 
> then they wont.  The status quo is easy to get stuck in and 
> help no one.
>
> Someone with a good background in GC's needs to step up and be 
> it's champion.  I expect that several people would rally to 
> help once some basic momentum is established.  So, willing to 
> be the rallying cry and step up?

I've been nagging about this for ages it feels. The problem is 
that D as no managed pointers. If that was the case, it would 
enable a myriad of GC possibilities for the D community to 
experiment with different GC algorithms. This at the same time 
keeping the possibility that managed pointers is just a pointer 
like today.

Today it doesn't matter if we have world class GC experts in the 
D community as the language itself limits what you can implement.

D suffers from that what can be seen in several other inventions. 
The inventor thinks that the invention is perfect and do not want 
to develop it further even if the shortcomings are obvious. Some 
other inventor comes along and drastically improves the design 
and the product really shoots off in popularity.