On 1/31/14, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bumping old thread:
>
> There is an ever-increasing amount of newcomers in #d on IRC who end up asking how to avoid the GC or at least to be able to determine where implicit allocations happen. I think we should work on creating a wiki page and gather as much advice as possible on dealing with the GC, implicit allocations, real-time constraints, etc.

It looks like this post was missed, and instead people started replying to messages from over a year ago. :)

On Saturday, 1 February 2014 at 20:26:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 1/31/14, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bumping old thread:
>>
>> There is an ever-increasing amount of newcomers in #d on IRC who
>> end up asking how to avoid the GC or at least to be able to
>> determine where implicit allocations happen. I think we should
>> work on creating a wiki page and gather as much advice as
>> possible on dealing with the GC, implicit allocations, real-time
>> constraints, etc.
>
> It looks like this post was missed, and instead people started
> replying to messages from over a year ago. :)

I found this page quite useful (http://dlang.org/memory.html), but I acknowledge it's probably not enough.

I've only been here a short time, but I'm beginning to see that things with "we should" likely won't every happen until they are replaced with "I should".

On Sunday, 2 February 2014 at 05:30:12 UTC, Mike wrote:
> On Saturday, 1 February 2014 at 20:26:51 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> On 1/31/14, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Bumping old thread:
>>>
>>> There is an ever-increasing amount of newcomers in #d on IRC who
>>> end up asking how to avoid the GC or at least to be able to
>>> determine where implicit allocations happen. I think we should
>>> work on creating a wiki page and gather as much advice as
>>> possible on dealing with the GC, implicit allocations, real-time
>>> constraints, etc.
>>
>> It looks like this post was missed, and instead people started
>> replying to messages from over a year ago. :)
>
> I found this page quite useful (http://dlang.org/memory.html), but I acknowledge it's probably not enough.
>
> I've only been here a short time, but I'm beginning to see that things with "we should" likely won't every happen until they are replaced with "I should".

I wrote this a while back:

http://poita.org/2012/12/15/using-d-without-the-gc.html

It doesn't cover everything though, and I think the static array initialisation allocation is now out-of-date.

Is it possible to switch off GC during compilation so that I will get
compilation error on every statement that invites GC in?

On Monday, 3 February 2014 at 12:22:48 UTC, Gopan wrote:
> Is it possible to switch off GC during compilation so that I will get
> compilation error on every statement that invites GC in?

No, right now only run-time asserts are possible. You may want to wait for https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1886 to be merged.

Am Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:22:47 +0000
schrieb "Gopan" <gopakumar.gg@gmail.com>:

> Is it possible to switch off GC during compilation so that I will
> get
> compilation error on every statement that invites GC in?

I would think that parts of druntime/Phobos make use of the GC
at program startup already. And in general any module not on
the compiler command-line when using that switch and with only
a .di file cannot be statically checked.
Even lazy initialization using the GC would not work:

  private Foo foo;

  @property Foo someThreadLocalFoo()
  {
      if (foo is null)
          foo = new Foo;  // <- error
      return foo;
  }

If you compile that module alone or as part of a library, the compiler has to assume that some other module will eventually make use of this function.

-- 
Marco