Memory safety depends entirely on GC ?

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 2/23/15 5:23 PM, deadalnix wrote:
> So far, what I feel from you and Walter is the will to not go into that
> direction and instead created a myriad of hacks for various special
> cases. I do think this is wrong headed and generally not the way
> forward. Languages should provide the most generic and powerful tool so
> that interesting schemes can be implemented on top of it.

This is a free world. Walter and I are working on a DIP. Please work on 
yours. I can't promise we'll choose to your liking, but this is the one 
way you can make your point heard and understood. What doesn't work is 
trash talk.

I guarantee I recognize brilliance when I see it. So if you have a 
brilliant idea, it won't be missed. Have at it. One thing I cannot do is 
choose a solution that you prefer over one I prefer - this does remain a 
subjective topic. I can't help it. But please don't consider me an idiot 
because I don't like what you propose.


Thanks,

Andrei