On 6 May 2014 17:16, Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, 6 May 2014 at 03:40:47 UTC, Manu via Digitalmars-d > wrote: > Java Azul VM GC was already handling 1 TB in 2010.
Is D compatible with this GC? And how does it go in an environment with 128mb of ram, and no free memory? > http://qconsf.com/sf2010/dl/qcon-sanfran-2010/slides/GilTene_GCNirvanaHighThroughputAndLowLatencyTogether.pdf > > GC is not the only way of doing automatic memory management, but > this ongoing discussion steams more from D's current GC status > and respective phobia in C world, and less from what a modern GC > is capable of. It's not a 'phobia', it's an incompatibility. Show me a 'modern' GC that's compatible with realtime+embedded, and also compatible with D, and then we can talk... I'm sure there's a very good reason nobody has raised such a technology for consideration. Framing the C world in this way is completely unfair. I've spent years here trying to reconcile my relationship with the GC. I've actually defended the GC on numerous occasions. I don't want to reject the GC, it's very convenient... but I think it's reached the point where I have to face the music. I want to know the plan, and if it remains incompatible with my industry, then I can't reasonably continue to advocate D in my field, can I? If it were my language, I know what I'd do. It may require some radical changes, and I would do it because I simply had _no other choice_. Please, make suggestions! It's been years, and I'm still waiting to hear another realistic proposal.
