Eliminate class allocators and deallocators?

[Jeremie Pelletier]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
>>>> Yeah I agree now after reading most of this thread, I know that 
>>>> these keywords just map to functions.
>>>>
>>>> I've seen a proposal of a global new template somewhere, I don't 
>>>> like that since at the global scope there are also structs, arrays 
>>>> and whatnot that can be allocated by 'new'.
>>>
>>> Well it's easy to handle all of those with conditional templates.
>>>
>>>> I don't like the static new either since it prevents subclasses from 
>>>> overriding their new/delete operations.
>>>>
>>>> What would then be a good way to replace new/delete operators to 
>>>> still have them overridable? Isn't that the convenience that first 
>>>> got them to be used in the first place? Other than global new/delete 
>>>> overrides which is plain silly in D.
>>>>
>>>> I've pretty much found alternatives to all my other points against 
>>>> taking out new/delete except for the override feature, find me an 
>>>> alternative for that too and I'll be voting for new/delete to be 
>>>> runtime function instead of language keywords, cause I can't think 
>>>> of anything right now.
>>>
>>> I think you'd find this article interesting:
>>>
>>> http://www.ddj.com/article/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=184405016&dept_url=/java/ 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>
>> That was a long read, but a most interesting one! I already was 
>> familiar of these design pattens but only used them where new didn't 
>> make sense, this article really was an eye opener on that level, 
>> thanks a lot!
>>
>> You have my vote to remove new/delete now :)
> 
> Someone convinced someone else of something on the Internets. What's 
> this world coming to???
> 
> Andrei

World peace, open-minded societies and money-free economies where love 
and sharing has won over fear and competition.

Maybe not, but I can dream.