Andrei's list of barriers to D adoption

[Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d]

On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 06:24 +0000, Mithun Hunsur via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> […]

> The problem is that D is targeted as a multi-paradigm systems 
> programming language, and while it's largely successful at that, 
> the GC doesn't fit in with that domain by nature of its existence.
> 
> There's no problem with _having_ a GC, it just shouldn't be the 
> default case for what's meant to be a systems language, 
> especially when language and standard library features become 
> dependent upon it.

No. As evidence I give you Go. The whole "it's a systems programming
language so it cannot have GC" is just so wrong in 2016 (as it was in
2004). Having a GC for a time critical real-time streaming application
is probably a bad idea, so turn GC off for that. D can do that.

D having a GC is not the problem, the problem is the D community
agamizing about a wrong issue instead of focusing on the real one: when
to switch the GC off.

> But I digress: we've had this debate before, we're having it now, 
> and we'll keep having it well into the future :-)

If the D community does continue to debate this, then D really will die
as a language. This is a dead issue. It has gone to the debating hall
in the sky. It is an ex-issue.

-- 
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20160606/73668911/attachment-0001.sig>