On 23 September 2014 14:41, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 9/22/14, 8:03 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: > >> I still think most of those users would accept RC instead of GC. Why not >> support RC in the language, and make all of this library noise redundant? >> > > A combo approach language + library delivers the most punch. How so? In what instances are complicated templates superior to a language RC type? Library RC can't really optimise well, RC requires language support to >> elide ref fiddling. >> > > For class objects that's what's going to happen indeed. Where is this discussion? Last time I raised it, it was fiercely shut down and dismissed.
