Smart pointers instead of GC?

[Don]

On Tuesday, 4 February 2014 at 11:57:25 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 February 2014 at 11:13:03 UTC, Don wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 4 February 2014 at 10:32:26 UTC, ed wrote:
>>>>> Realistically D as a systems language isn't even at the 
>>>>> hobby stage.
>>>>
>>>> We're using D as a systems language on a global commercial 
>>>> scale. And no, we don't use malloc/free. We just don't use 
>>>> Phobos.
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm thinking too much embedded, which I admit isn't 
>>> fair on D and at this stage maybe not a realistic comparison.
>>
>> Yeah, I dunno what "systems language" means really.
>
> For me it means you can write an OS with it, even if some tiny 
> parts require the use of Assembly glue.

I know that's the *origin* of the term, but I don't think that's 
the *meaning*.

I mean, that's a really obscure task. People almost never write a 
new OS, and languages have claimed to be systems languages 
without ever having done it.

AFAICT what it really means is "like C" in some vaguely-defined 
sense.