On Monday, 29 September 2014 at 17:04:54 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Yes but neither decision belongs to library code except for
very rare
cases.
You just assert it, so all I can say is "I understand you
believe this". I've motivated my argument. You may want to do
the same for yours.
I probably have missed the part with arguments :) Your reasoning
is not fundamentally different from "GC should be enough" but
extended to several options from single one.
My argument is simple - one can't forsee everything. I remember
reading book of one guy who has been advocating thing called
"policy-based design", you may know him ;) Was quite impressed
with the simple but practical basic idea - decoupling parts of
the implementation that are not inherently related.
So you don't have an answer. And again you are confusing memory
allocation with memory management.
Yes, sorry, I don't have an answer. Or time do deeply dive into
the code unless it is really important or my direct
responsibility.
Unfortunately, I don't see an answer how your proposal fits our
code either. Most of Sociomantic code relies on using arrays as
ref arguments to avoid creating of new GC roots (no, we don't
need/want to switch to ARC). This was several times called as the
reason why Phobos in its current shape is largely unusable for
out needs even when D2 switch is finished. I don't see how
proposal in original post changes that.
