> Even if you avoid malloc, Way too many people believe the difference between malloc/new+free/delete vs a GC is that one is deterministic and the other isn't.

> Even if you avoid malloc, Way too many people believe the difference between malloc/new+free/delete vs a GC is that one is deterministic and the other isn't. (It doesn't help that textbooks still teach this!) Both are subject to the whims of the system's memory and, if swap is enabled, IO systems. And unless you understand your call graph very well, constructing an object that constructs other objects is not something you are likely to be capable of calculating the performance of in a non-GC language. Same goes for destructors. The actual difference is that in language without GC's typically have explicit syntax for dynamic memory allocation (though it can happen by surprise in C++ from time to time!), which means if you are writing latency sensitive code, you can just avoid dynamic allocation altogether. But there is no reason why GC languages can't do the same! In fact, newer GC languages sometimes do, and nowadays C# give you more control over stack allocation, so careful C# coding can also avoid using dynamic memory.