On 17 April 2014 09:20, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

On 4/16/2014 3:42 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:

ARC may in fact be the most advantageous for a specific use case, but that in no
way means that all use cases will see a performance improvement, and in all
likelihood, may see a decrease in performance.

Right on. Pervasive ARC is very costly, meaning that one will have to define alongside it all kinds of schemes to mitigate those costs, all of which are expensive for the programmer to get right.

GC is _very_ costly. From my experience comparing iOS and Android, it's clear that GC is vastly more costly and troublesome than ARC. What measure do you use to make that assertion?

You're also making a hidden assertion that the D GC will never improve, since most GC implementations require some sort of work similar to ref fiddling anyway...