GCs in the news

[Remo via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:36:36 UTC, Vic wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 13:02:22 UTC, Remo wrote:
> <snip>
>> The quality of GC implementation is probably more important.
>>
>
> I disagree, I am a burn victim and don't trust smoke.

Well it appears to be very hard to make proper GC.
So all the hate again GC could be because of suboptimal 
implementation?
Any way as written before memory is not only one resource that 
need to be managed. So a language need to offer solution not only 
for memory management but all other resources.
In C++ this is called RAII and work reasonable well.
Rust looks even more promising for me.

> Ideally it is optional.

Yes for me too.
GC must be optional.
I hope @nogc will allow this for D.

>
> Cheers,
> Vic