GCs in the news

[Remo via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 09:20:36 UTC, Russel Winder via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> It appears still to be a general meme that performance required 
> no GC
> and GC mean poor performance. The debate has been restarted on 
> the Go
> mailing list under the banner "go without garbage collector". 
> The
> response to will Go remove the garbage collector was somewhat
> unequivocal: nope.

GC or no GC is that the right question ?

The quality of GC implementation is probably more important.

"Simpler and faster GC for Go"
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v4Oqa0WwHunqlb8C3ObL_uNQw3DfSY-ztoA-4wWbKcg/pub

Another point that will be ignored in such debates is that GC 
gives solution for only one problem, memory management.
How about other resources, how to manage them ?