RFC: moving forward with @nogc Phobos

[Manu via Digitalmars-d]

On 30 September 2014 08:04, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 9/29/14, 10:16 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I would go just for (b) with compiler support for
>> increment/decrement removal, as I think it will be too complex having to
>> support everything and this will complicate all libraries.
>
>
> Compiler already knows (after inlining) that ++i and --i cancel each other,
> so we should be in good shape there. -- Andrei

The compiler doesn't know that MyLibrary_AddRef(Thing *t); and
MyLibrary_DecRef(Thing *t); cancel eachother out though...
rc needs primitives that the compiler understands implicitly, so that
rc logic can be more complex than ++i/--i;