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

[Sean Kelly]

Julio César Carrascal Urquijo wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> This is the kind of comment that scares me.
>> How does one reconcile this with Walter's comment "The GC has been 
>> pretty heavily tested. It's 6 years old, and it's stood up extremely 
>> well."
>>   --(digitalmars.com digitalmars.D:43916)
> 
> Even if a piece of software is reliable and has been heavily tested 
> doesn't mean it can't be improved. The current GC has it's shortcomings 
> and that has been acknowledged by Walter.
> 
> That doesn't mean it is unusable (On the contrary), just that under 
> certain circumstances you should use other implementations and that's 
> why a pluggable architecture is needed for garbage collection in the 
> language.

Agreed.  And for what it's worth, I think this plugging should occur at 
link-time, not run-time.  Hot-swapping GCs while the app is running just 
raises too many weird issues.


Sean