Worst ideas/features in programming languages?

[Antonio]

On Friday, 15 October 2021 at 09:53:18 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> On Friday, 15 October 2021 at 09:47:48 UTC, Antonio wrote:
>>
>> Rust has not GC.
>>
>
> Rust has GC, i.e. reference counting. This is also often 
> required with multiple ownership which you often end up with in 
> data structures. I would rather say GC is mandatory in Rust, 
> unless you want to take the unsafe approach.
>
> It's a matter what you regard as GC. Is only tracing GC 
> regarded as true GC?

Hi IGotD-  really fast response :-)

Nim has reference counting too (combined with "cycle" detection 
"true" GC)... I really love not to use the "ownership" pattern 
(it's like strait jacket)... some "functional" tries with Rust 
results in "hard to read" code... As time goes by, I find it 
harder to be imperative.

When I say that GC/Not GC is a problem is because there is an 
eternal discussion in forums and D maintains itself "neutral" 
when, in fact, it is a GC language...  There is Walter 
experimental tries to introduce "ownership" equivalent (at least 
last time I review), there is people requesting a non GC based 
Phobos library...

I consider myself an "external observer".  May be D must 
introduce the Nim filosofy about GC( select your best option:  
Pure GC, Counter + GC, Counter only) and developer must be 
responsible about avoiding problems under the selected scenary, 
and Phobos must be compatible with the most restrictive one 
(Counter only)

My point is about D must be clear and advance, it's impossible to 
keep everyone happy.