July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to John | On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 13:29:18 UTC, John wrote:
<snip>
>
> If D came without GC, it would have replaced C++ a long time ago!
Agree +1000.
If GC is so good, why not make it an option, have a base lib w/o GC.
If I want GC, I got me JRE. It seems that some in D want to write a better JRE, and that just won't happen ever.
Cheers,
Vic
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Vic | On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 16:56:56 UTC, Vic wrote:
> If GC is so good, why not make it an option, have a base lib w/o GC.
Much of Phobos already is GC free. The parts that aren't should be easy to convert to use user-supplied buffers. Please add enhancement requests for cases where there isn't a GC-free alternative to a standard library routine.
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Peter Alexander | On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:13:04 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 16:56:56 UTC, Vic wrote:
>> If GC is so good, why not make it an option, have a base lib w/o GC.
>
> Much of Phobos already is GC free. The parts that aren't should be easy to convert to use user-supplied buffers. Please add enhancement requests for cases where there isn't a GC-free alternative to a standard library routine.
If that is true, I may even do a $ bounty to make Phobos GC free.
I may do the same, $ bounty on vibe.d port to GC free.
I don't know D enough to be able to do that, but good news to me.
Cheers,
Vic
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Vic | Vic:
>> If D came without GC, it would have replaced C++ a long time ago!
>
> Agree +1000.
I see no proof of this. And not everybody hates GCs.
Bye,
bearophile
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bearophile | I hate GC, so there.
> I see no proof of this. And not everybody hates GCs.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Remo | On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 13:02:22 UTC, Remo wrote:
<snip>
> The quality of GC implementation is probably more important.
>
I disagree, I am a burn victim and don't trust smoke.
Ideally it is optional.
Cheers,
Vic
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Right | On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 05:32:36PM +0000, Right via Digitalmars-d wrote: > I hate GC, so there. > > >I see no proof of this. And not everybody hates GCs. [...] I don't, so here. :D T -- I see that you JS got Bach. |
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Vic | On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 05:28:01PM +0000, Vic via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:13:04 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote: > >On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 16:56:56 UTC, Vic wrote: > >>If GC is so good, why not make it an option, have a base lib w/o GC. > > > >Much of Phobos already is GC free. The parts that aren't should be easy to convert to use user-supplied buffers. Please add enhancement requests for cases where there isn't a GC-free alternative to a standard library routine. > > If that is true, I may even do a $ bounty to make Phobos GC free. > > I may do the same, $ bounty on vibe.d port to GC free. > > I don't know D enough to be able to do that, but good news to me. [...] Over the last year or so, IIRC, there has been a push (a slow but nonetheless steady push) to make as much of Phobos GC-free as possible. I'd say most (all?) of std.algorithm and std.range should be GC-free by now, and probably many of the others can be made GC-free quite easily with the tools that we now have. AFAIK some work still needs to be done with std.string; Walter for one has started some work to implement range-based equivalents for std.string functions, which would be non-allocating; we just need a bit of work to push things through. DMD 2.066 will have @nogc, which will make it easy to discover which remaining parts of Phobos are still not GC-free. Then we'll know where to direct our efforts. :-) T -- Elegant or ugly code as well as fine or rude sentences have something in common: they don't depend on the language. -- Luca De Vitis |
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to H. S. Teoh | On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:49:24 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 05:28:01PM +0000, Vic via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:13:04 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
>> >On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 16:56:56 UTC, Vic wrote:
>> >>If GC is so good, why not make it an option, have a base lib w/o GC.
>> >
>> >Much of Phobos already is GC free. The parts that aren't should be
>> >easy to convert to use user-supplied buffers. Please add enhancement
>> >requests for cases where there isn't a GC-free alternative to a
>> >standard library routine.
>>
>> If that is true, I may even do a $ bounty to make Phobos GC free.
>>
>> I may do the same, $ bounty on vibe.d port to GC free.
>>
>> I don't know D enough to be able to do that, but good news to me.
> [...]
>
> Over the last year or so, IIRC, there has been a push (a slow but
> nonetheless steady push) to make as much of Phobos GC-free as possible.
> I'd say most (all?) of std.algorithm and std.range should be GC-free by
> now, and probably many of the others can be made GC-free quite easily
> with the tools that we now have.
>
> AFAIK some work still needs to be done with std.string; Walter for one
> has started some work to implement range-based equivalents for
> std.string functions, which would be non-allocating; we just need a bit
> of work to push things through.
>
> DMD 2.066 will have @nogc, which will make it easy to discover which
> remaining parts of Phobos are still not GC-free. Then we'll know where
> to direct our efforts. :-)
>
>
> T
That's good news! See, we're getting there, just bear with us. This begs the question of course, how will this affect existing code? My code is string intensive.
|
July 17, 2014 Re: GCs in the news | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Vic | On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 17:28:02 UTC, Vic wrote: > If that is true, I may even do a $ bounty to make Phobos GC free. Unless you do some hard real-time barebone stuff it is quite likely you can do with limited usage of GC. Hiring some of experienced D user to make a one-time case study with detailed recommendation can be an option if you are seriously concerned. > I may do the same, $ bounty on vibe.d port to GC free. vibe.d has -version=VibedManualMemoryManagement which removes much of GC usage from its internals. Not 100% @nogc but some entry point to start with for interested parties. > I don't know D enough to be able to do that, but good news to me. Here Don mentions some of techniques we (Sociomantic) use to minimize GC impact : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmE7ZR1_YKs In the end it comes to famous Bjarne quote : "C++ may be the best language for garbage collection because it generates so few garbage". Same can be applied to D with proper coding style. |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation