On 4/16/2014 5:06 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
It's not just ARC. As far as I know, most GC algorithms require some action to be taken when changing the value of a pointer. If you're seeing this as unnecessary bloat, then there's not much hope in a better GC for D either.
Yeah, those are called write gates. The write gate is used to tell the GC that "I wrote to this section of memory, so that bucket is dirty now." They're fine in a language without pointers, but I just don't see how one could write fast loops using pointers with write gates.
But beyond that I wonder if @nogc won't entrench that stance even more. Here's the question: is assigning to a pointer allowed in a @nogc function? Of course it's allowed! Assigning to a pointer does not involve the GC in its current implementation... but what if another GC implementation to be used later needs something to be done every time a pointer is modified, is this "something to be done" allowed in a @nogc function?
It would have to be.
