manual memory management

[deadalnix]

On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 07:06:03 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 06:57:34 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 06:56:00 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 8 January 2013 at 22:19:56 UTC, Walter Bright 
>>> wrote:
>>>> One thing I'd add is that a GC is *required* if you want to 
>>>> have a language that guarantees memory safety
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Pardon?  shared_ptr anyone? You can totally have a language 
>>> that only provides new/delete facilities and which only 
>>> access to memory through managed pointers like shared_ptr... 
>>> without a GC. I don't see where a GC is "required" as you say.
>>
>> Such a program is guaranteed to have memory leak, unless you 
>> add a GC on top of the managed pointers.
>
> Oh and you should also take a look at Newlisp

I certainly wont if you don't even bother explain why I should.