4 ms·

> no exceptions There is a flag to allocate them with malloc, and use RC. > no dynamic arrays, I think you can't even use the common string in D without the G

> no exceptions There is a flag to allocate them with malloc, and use RC. > no dynamic arrays, I think you can't even use the common string in D without the GC. Totally not true. You can't concatenate arrays (string are just arrays of char) with `arr1 ~ arr2` and you can't `new` them, but you can do pretty much anything else. > People arguing that D can be used without a GC are just trying to sell you on something. Of course, but C++ people have an unnatural aversion to GC also the D GC only ever collects if you allocate from it. No allocations == no collections. For the most part, GC is a productivity enhancer, you can roll your own allocators, use malloc, etc. if you need to. You can statically ensure that some or all of your code doesn't use the GC and as expected there is a productivity/code maintenance price you pay for doing so.

Kranar 4y ago
You can absolutely argue the benefits of a GC, and there are plenty of GC'd languages that as you say are great productivity enhancers. If anything, D should stop pretending that it doesn't have a GC and stop trying to appeal to people who don't want a GC, it's a losing battle. D should just accept the fact that it is a GC'd language and start making the argument for why it's a better GC'd language than Java or C# or the host of other GC'd languages. The vast majority of C++ developers do not want a GC'd version of C++, but it's possible that Java developers could be interested in a C++-like language that has a GC and good C compatibility.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  D is not a xxxx language. It enables programming in many diverse styles, styles that some languages are totally dedicated to (like Haskell is to functional programming). GC is just one of the styles. Yes, if you use "new" you get a GC allocation. But nobody makes you use "new". If you use the array concatenation operator, it uses the GC. But there are many ways to concatenate an array that don't use it. As for closures, they get allocated on the GC only if they escape the stack frame. This is detected, and if you want to be told about it, annotate the function with @nogc.
- pebal 4y ago
  You are absolutely right. GC can be an advantage and there is no need to be ashamed of it. Herb Sutter is working on "syntax 2" for the C++ language and wants to have GC smart pointers in C++. The D creators should work on improving the GC so that it does not force pauses instead of explaining that GC does not have to be used.
Kranar 4y ago
>There is a flag to allocate them with malloc, and use RC. What is that flag? Do you have a link to the documentation? I do remember talk about adding a feature that would allow exceptions to be allocated in @nogc code, but that was never ultimately implemented and looks to be postponed (to the best of my knowledge).

Kranar 4y ago

You can absolutely argue the benefits of a GC, and there are plenty of GC'd languages that as you say are great productivity enhancers. If anything, D should stop pretending that it doesn't have a GC and stop trying to appeal to people who don't want a GC, it's a losing battle. D should just accept the fact that it is a GC'd language and start making the argument for why it's a better GC'd language than Java or C# or the host of other GC'd languages. The vast majority of C++ developers do not want a GC'd version of C++, but it's possible that Java developers could be interested in a C++-like language that has a GC and good C compatibility.

WalterBright 4y ago
D is not a xxxx language. It enables programming in many diverse styles, styles that some languages are totally dedicated to (like Haskell is to functional programming). GC is just one of the styles. Yes, if you use "new" you get a GC allocation. But nobody makes you use "new". If you use the array concatenation operator, it uses the GC. But there are many ways to concatenate an array that don't use it. As for closures, they get allocated on the GC only if they escape the stack frame. This is detected, and if you want to be told about it, annotate the function with @nogc.
pebal 4y ago
You are absolutely right. GC can be an advantage and there is no need to be ashamed of it. Herb Sutter is working on "syntax 2" for the C++ language and wants to have GC smart pointers in C++. The D creators should work on improving the GC so that it does not force pauses instead of explaining that GC does not have to be used.

Kranar 4y ago

>There is a flag to allocate them with malloc, and use RC. What is that flag? Do you have a link to the documentation? I do remember talk about adding a feature that would allow exceptions to be allocated in @nogc code, but that was never ultimately implemented and looks to be postponed (to the best of my knowledge).