https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_experimental_deferred_and_unordered/

Ali

On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 13:50 -0700, Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d- announce wrote:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_exp erimental_deferred_and_unordered/
> 

And the comments in the thread confirm why Reddit is a massive waste of time and resources. It should be garbage collected.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 20:50:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_experimental_deferred_and_unordered/
>
> Ali

GC is unnacceptable !

Ho ! a deferred and unordered destruction library, really cool !

Is there intelligent life in the C++ world ?

On Friday, 30 September 2016 at 03:42:27 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> GC is unnacceptable !
>
> Ho ! a deferred and unordered destruction library, really cool !
>
> Is there intelligent life in the C++ world ?

I think the difference is that the solution is scoped to only those objects that you chose to use GC on, rather than GC everything by default.  Because the GC is limited to a small set of objects and is done in a controlled manner, this avoids unpredictable pauses and problems with interop with external libraries.

On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 20:50:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_experimental_deferred_and_unordered/
>
> Ali

The paragraph I like the most there is: "The other important difference is that deferred_heap meets C++'s zero-overhead principle by being opt-in and granular, not default and global"

That is what I like the most about Herb's work...

On Friday, 30 September 2016 at 14:12:30 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 20:50:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_experimental_deferred_and_unordered/
>>
>> Ali
>
> The paragraph I like the most there is: "The other important difference is that deferred_heap meets C++'s zero-overhead principle by being opt-in and granular, not default and global"
>
> That is what I like the most about Herb's work...

We already have opt-in for the most part and I've been pushing for granular with isolated since at least 2014. So yeah, Herb's proposal is old news, but worse, it is kind of disappointing that it is anything new for the D community. I'm not sure if I or the community failed, but clearly there is a major failure here.

On Friday, 7 October 2016 at 21:21:43 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>
> We already have opt-in for the most part and I've been pushing for granular with isolated since at least 2014. So yeah, Herb's proposal is old news, but worse, it is kind of disappointing that it is anything new for the D community.

Something that isn't "new for the D community" can still be interesting.

On Friday, 7 October 2016 at 21:21:43 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Friday, 30 September 2016 at 14:12:30 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 20:50:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> The paragraph I like the most there is: "The other important difference is that deferred_heap meets C++'s zero-overhead principle by being opt-in and granular, not default and global"
>>
>> That is what I like the most about Herb's work...
>
> We already have opt-in for the most part and I've been pushing for granular with isolated since at least 2014. So yeah, Herb's proposal is old news, but worse, it is kind of disappointing that it is anything new for the D community. I'm not sure if I or the community failed, but clearly there is a major failure here.

I don't know about failing - the isolated thing immediately reminded me of your proposal.

Atila

On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 20:50:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_experimental_deferred_and_unordered/
>
> Ali

Is it possible to have something similar as in library rather than GC in core language construct?

On Monday, 10 April 2017 at 04:17:21 UTC, Swoorup Joshi wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 September 2016 at 20:50:28 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/54xnbg/herb_sutters_experimental_deferred_and_unordered/
>>
>> Ali
>
> Is it possible to have something similar as in library rather than GC in core language construct?

Not without breaking changes.