On 07/13/2010 05:15 PM, bearophile wrote:
Andrei:
It adds misconception and confusion. delete must disappear from D.
Is this case important?
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=113319
Bye,
bearophile
I don't understand what you mean by "this case". All I'm saying is
simply that all structures and algorithms of GCs are optimized for
automatic bulk collections and all structures and algorithms of manual
allocators are optimized for manual frees. So it is definitely not
reasonable to ask one to do the job of the other.
druntime's current allocator does offer a reasonably effective method of
manual deallocation, but that risks at creating confusion among users
who might think it's reasonable to expect that any later GC for D would
have such a method. The reality is that D's current GC is rather old
technology and we definitely must expect that any state-of-the-art GC
added to D cannot honor manual deallocation requests.
Andrei
