RFC: moving forward with @nogc Phobos

[Mike via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 29 September 2014 at 20:07:41 UTC, Uranuz wrote:

> 1. As far as I understand allocation and memory management of
> entities like class (Object), dynamic arrays and associative
> arrays is part of language/ runtime. What is proposed here is
> *fix* to standart library. But that allocation and MM happening
> via GC is not *fault* of standart library but is predefined
> behaviour of D lang itself and it's runtime. The standard 
> library
> becomes a `hostage` of runtime library in this situation. Do you
> really sure that we should "fix" standart library in that way?
> For me it looks like implementing struts for standard lib (which
> is not broken yet ;) ) in order to compensate behaviour of
> runtime lib.

This really hits the nail on the head, and I think your other 
comments and questions are also quite insightful.

IMO the proposal that started this thread, @nogc, and -vgc are 
all beating around the bush rather than addressing the 
fundamental problem.

Mike