DIP60: @nogc attribute

[Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 16 April 2014 at 11:51:07 UTC, Manu via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 16 April 2014 19:03, JN via Digitalmars-d 
> <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com>wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 16 April 2014 at 01:57:29 UTC, Mike wrote:
>>
>>> I don't believe users hesitant to use D will suddenly come to 
>>> D now that
>>> there is a @nogc attribute.  I also don't believe they want 
>>> to avoid the
>>> GC, even if they say they do.  I believe what they really 
>>> want is to have
>>> an alternative to the GC.
>>>
>>
>> I'd have to agree. I doubt @nogc will change anything, people 
>> will just
>> start complaining about limitations of @nogc (no array concat, 
>> having to
>> use own libraries which may be incompatible with phobos). The 
>> complaints
>> mostly come from the fact that D wants to offer a choice, in 
>> other
>> languages people just accept what they have. You don't see C# 
>> developers
>> complaining much about having to use GC, or C++ programmers 
>> all over the
>> world asking for GC. Well, most of the new games (Unity3D) are 
>> done in C#
>> nowadays and people live with it even though game development 
>> is one of the
>> biggest C++ loving and GC hating crowd there is.
>>
>> Another issue is the quality of D garbage collector, but adding
>> alternative memory management ways doesn't help, fragmenting 
>> the codebase.
>>
>
> I don't really have an opinion on @nogc, but I feel like I'm 
> one of the
> people that definitely should.
> I agree with these comments somewhat though.
>
> I have as big a GC-phobia as anyone, but I have never said the 
> proper
> strategy is to get rid of it, and I'm not sure how helpful 
> @nogc is.
> I don't *mind* the idea of a @nogc attribute; I do like the 
> idea that I may
> have confidence some call tree doesn't invoke the GC, but I 
> can't say I'm
> wildly excited about this change. I'm not sure about the larger
> implications for the language, or what the result of this will 
> do to code
> at large. I'm not yet sure how annoying I'll find typing it 
> everywhere, and
> whether that's a worthwhile tradeoff.
> I have a short list of things I'm dying for in D for years, and 
> this is not
> on it. Nowhere near. (rvalue temp -> ref args pleeeease! Linear 
> algebra in
> D really sucks!!)
>
> The thing is, this doesn't address the problem. I *want* to 
> like the GC...
> I want a GC that is acceptable.
>
> I am convinced that ARC would be acceptable, and I've never 
> heard anyone
> suggest any proposal/fantasy/imaginary GC implementation that 
> would be
> acceptable...
> In complete absence of a path towards an acceptable GC 
> implementation, I'd
> prefer to see people that know what they're talking about 
> explore how
> refcounting could be used instead.
> GC backed ARC sounds like it would acceptably automate the 
> circular
> reference catching that people fuss about, while still 
> providing a workable
> solution for embedded/realtime users; disable(/don't link) the 
> backing GC,
> make sure you mark weak references properly.
>
> That would make this whole effort redundant because there would 
> be no fear
> of call trees causing a surprise collect under that environment.
>
> Most importantly, it maintains compatibility with phobos and 
> all other
> libs. It doesn't force realtime/embedded users into their own 
> little
> underground world where they have @nogc everywhere and totally 
> different
> allocation API's than the rest of the D universe, producing 
> endless
> problems interacting with libraries. These are antiquated 
> problems we've
> suffered in C++ for decades that I _really_ don't want to see 
> transfer into
> D.
>
> I'd like to suggest experts either, imagine/invent/design a GC 
> that is
> acceptable to the realtime/embedded crowd (seriously, can 
> anyone even
> _imagine_ a feasible solution in D? I can't, but I'm not an 
> expert by any
> measure), or take ARC seriously and work out how it can be 
> implemented;
> what are the hurdles, are they surmountable? Is there room for 
> an
> experimental fork?


Specially when C# is already blessed on the PS4, although not for 
AAA games of course.

http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2014/Apr-14.html

--
Paulo