new D2.0 + C++ language

[Denis Koroskin]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 19:54:10 +0300, Weed <resume755 at mail.ru> wrote:

> naryl пишет:
>> Weed Wrote:
>>> naryl яПНяПНяПНяПНяПН:
>>>> Weed Wrote:
>>>>> BCS яПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПНяПН:
>>>>>> Yes you can be
>>>>>> very careful in keeping track of pointers (not practical) or use  
>>>>>> smart
>>>>>> pointers and such (might end up costing more than GC)
>>>>> I am do not agree: GC overexpenditure CPU or memory. Typically, both.
>>>> I wouldn't be so sure about CPU:
>>>> http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=gdc&lang2=gpp&box=1
>>> You should not compare benchmarks - they depend on the quality of the
>>> testing code.
>>
>> Then find a way to prove that GC costs more CPU time than explicit  
>> memory management and/or reference counting.
>
> I suggest that reference counting for -debug.
> Yes, it slows down a bit. As invariant{}, in{}, out(){}, assert()

Yeah, ref-count your objects in debug and let the memory leak in release!