manual memory management

Walter Bright newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Tue Jan 8 23:23:12 PST 2013


On 1/8/2013 10:55 PM, 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.

Reference counting is a valid form of GC.

C++'s shared_ptr, however, is both optional and allows access to the underlying 
raw pointers. Hence, memory safety cannot be guaranteed.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list