Idiomatic D using GC as a library writer

[Guillaume Piolat]

There are legitimate uses cases when you can't afford the runtime 
machinery (attach/detach every incoming thread in a shared 
library), more than not being able to afford the GC from a 
performance point of view.

GC gives you higher productivity and better performance with the 
time gained.

Now, @nogc code is good for performance since (even in a GC 
program) you will have no hidden allocation anymore, if you also 
disable postBlut and copy ctor, unlike in C++ where hidden copies 
are rempant.


On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 09:53:41 UTC, vushu wrote:
> What are your thoughts about using GC as a library writer?

I don't use it always, but wish I could do it.
Meanwhile, I make plenty of nothrow @nogc code.

On Sunday, 4 December 2022 at 09:53:41 UTC, vushu wrote:
> If you wan't to include a library into your project aren't you 
> more inclined to use a library which is gc free?

Yes I am, but my needs are very specific and only the "betterC" 
subset fits it, and it's certainly not the nominal case in D, nor 
should it be. Some of the D target have strict requirements, for 
example Hipreme engine use audio-formats (nothrow @nogc), but 
audio-formats uses exceptions internally, maybe that will be an 
issue, depending on the flavour of D runtime it uses.