Am 09.10.2013 17:46, schrieb Paulo Pinto:
Am 09.10.2013 16:30, schrieb Manu:
On 9 October 2013 17:31, Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com
<mailto:newshou...@digitalmars.com>> wrote:
On 10/9/2013 12:29 AM, Manu wrote:
Does anyone here REALLY believe that a bunch of volunteer
contributors can
possibly do what apple failed to do with their squillions of
dollars and engineers?
I haven't heard anybody around here propose the path to an
acceptable solution.
It's perpetually in the too-hard basket, hence we still have the
same GC as
forever and it's going nowhere.
What do you propose?
ARC. I've been here years now, and I see absolutely no evidence that the
GC is ever going to improve. I can trust ARC, it's predictable, I can
control it.
Also, proper support for avoiding the GC without severe inconvenience as
constantly keeps coming up. But I don't think there's any debate on that
one. Everyone seems to agree.
As someone that is in the sidelines and doesn't really use D, my opinion
should not count that much, if at all.
However, rewriting D's memory management to be ARC based will have
performance impact if the various D compilers aren't made ARC aware.
Then there is the whole point of rewriting phobos and druntime to use
ARC instead of GC.
Will the return on investment pay off, instead of fixing the existing GC?
What will be the message sent to the outsiders wondering if D is stable
enough to be adopted, and see these constant rewrites?
--
Paulo
not manual ARC - compiler generated ARC - so there is no need for rewrite
