D is crap

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 8 July 2016 at 21:53:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Friday, 8 July 2016 at 12:46:03 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> As for GC, it's hard to tell. When D was actually (not 
>> hypothetically) created, GC was _the_ big thing. Java had just 
>> taken off, people were pissed off with C/C++, programming and 
>> coding was becoming more and more common.
>
> Errr... Garbage collection was common since the 60s.

Which is not the point. My point was that everybody wanted GC 
after Java. And D was invented when GC was expected by many 
people.

> One problem with GC in the late 80s and early 90s is that it 
> requires twice as much memory and memory was scarce so 
> reference counting was/is the better option. You could make the 
> same argument about templates, memory...

Which is why D wouldn't have taken off in the 80ies (see my post 
above).

> I also don't recall anyone being in awe of Java having GC. The 
> big selling point was portability and the very hyped up idea 
> that Java would run well in the browser, which did not 
> materialize. Another selling point was that it wasn't 
> Microsoft...

GC was a big selling point. Every Java book went on about how 
much safer it is, that you have more time for productive code, 
blah ... Apple even added GC to Objective-C to appease the GC 
crowd.