OSNews article about C++09 degenerates into C++ vs. D discussion

[Georg Wrede]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
> 
>> Indeed.  The people who really need to be GC-free are a tiny minority. 
>> Wasting a lot of manpower creating a non-GC library just people who 
>> don't want to convert from C++ will have one less justification for 
>> not using D sees like a huge waste of effort to me.
> 
> I translated Empire from C to D. It worked fine, and did not use the gc 
> at all. It didn't require a new runtime library.

Cool! And I guess I'm not the only one who'd never have guessed.

Shouldn't this get a whole lot more exposure than now?

This ought to be the first thing one thinks of anytime somebody takes up 
the GC "issue".