forcing "@nogc" on class destructors

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 at 09:03:32 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
Grøstad wrote:
>> You assert that something is too expensive for system 
>> language, which is not a negative, so the burden of proof is 
>> on you, substantiate your claim or you are just generating 
>> noise.
>
> Oh... But you are the one that is challenging the status quo. 
> Not me. The excitement created by Rust is proof enough for what 
> the status quo is.
>

That's irrelevant. Once again, you are giving into the rhetoric 
bullshit. Or, as to quote Coluche « C'est pas parce qu'il sont 
nombreux à avoir tort qu'ils ont raison » that I would translate 
by "It is not because many of them are wrong that they are right."

What is the status quo is irrelevant. You make a claim, you 
substantiate.