We are forking D

[JN]

On Wednesday, 3 January 2024 at 09:28:15 UTC, Martyn wrote:
> The only area I personally would disagree on is:-
> `Embracing the GC and improving upon it, disregarding betterC 
> and nogc in the process`
>
> I think GC should be optional or, atleast, have some kind of 
> Allocator feature so we can have control if needed.
>
> D allows you to code whatever way you like, or a combination of 
> them... why not provide this power when it comes to memory?
>

Or perhaps that power comes with maintenance cost. I don't have 
experience with language design, but I assume there are some 
features that are easier to implement or possible at all only if 
you assume a GC is present. But if you always have to assume GC 
may not be present, you are limiting the development of the 
language. Not saying whether GC is the right way or refcounting 
or anything else, but it's certainly easier if you only have one 
real memory management method to deal with.