GCs in the news

[bachmeier via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 13:29:18 UTC, John wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 09:57:09 UTC, currysoup wrote:
>> It's not about "acceptance", it's about the reality that a GC 
>> is not a universal solution to memory management.
>>
>> Just from watching a few of the DConf 2014 talks, if you want 
>> performance you avoid the GC at all costs (even if that means 
>> allocating into huge predefined buffers). Once you're going to 
>> these lengths to avoid garbage collection it begs the 
>> question, why are you even using this language? Within this 
>> community the question is rhetorical but to outsiders I feel 
>> it's a major concern.
>
>
> If D came without GC, it would have replaced C++ a long time 
> ago!

The only thing that would have been replaced is the complaints 
that D has a garbage collector with complaints that D doesn't 
have the tools and existing libraries of C++. If C++ users were 
sincere in their claims that they really want to use D, they'd 
have disabled the garbage collector and used it.

I think the GC issue is eating resources that would be better 
spent elsewhere.