Walter Bright Wrote: > On 12/11/2011 10:34 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote: > > In my experience programming embedded systems in highly constrained > > environments > > usually means assembly or at most a C compiler using lots > > of compiler specific extensions for the target environment. > > > > I fail to see how D without GC could be a better tool in such enviroments. > > For a system with a tiny amount of memory, D probably is the wrong tool. My > suggestion would be: > > 0..64K assembler > 64K..1M C > 1M+ D > > The larger your program is, the more D starts to pull ahead.
Exactly, and with 1M+ we are already getting into the processor's realm which have C# and Java tolchains with AOT compilation and GC with real time extensions available. So why have D without GC for such environments?
