Tasks, actors and garbage collection

[SealabJaster]

On Tuesday, 27 April 2021 at 13:29:43 UTC, evilrat wrote:
> So what's the problem with you?

Just commenting here as an observation, I think one of his main 
points is that there's a lack of a standard library based around 
allocators rather than the GC.

While there's dub packages for this stuff, it's all very 
scattered and incompatible with one another. And most of the 
higher level libraries make use of the GC instead of supporting 
allocators (which is understandable, considering they were never 
moved out of std.experimental).

I *think* what he's trying to say is that, while D allows you to 
avoid the GC and do whatever, the overall ecosystem for @nogc is 
quite lacking and has no leadership or vision for something 
cohesive, and is just a hodgepodge of random hobby libraries.

I personally wouldn't use D if it didn't have its GC, so I do 
feel that claims that "D is perfectly useable without the GC" 
while technically true, may not be practically true. If that 
makes sense. Especially if compared to @nogc languages like C++ 
and Rust.

All the "anti-bloat" and "pragmatic" stuff though I have no clue 
about. D's super pragmatic. Phobos may or may not be bloated, 
idk, I feel I don't even use a large portion of Phobos. Mostly 
just the metaprogramming, algorithm/ranges, and 
formatting+conversion stuff. Also a hint of 
std.experimental.logger

My point is, even though this guy's very strong with his wording 
and I'd also say flat out incorrect with some of these 
statements, there's areas here that might be worth thinking about 
a bit more since D may have deficiencies there.