On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 01:11:46PM +0000, matheus via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Saturday, 6 June 2020 at 05:16:59 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > ... and, tragically, the reason for that is mostly because we wrote
> > this thing in C++! I've been having a really un-fun time at work
> > because I failed to make a pitch for D in the ~18 months window we
> > had, and now I have to suffer that failure :(
>
> I'm really curious, if you had those features (Shared for example) the
> way you liked... you could pitched the company (Blizzard) to develop
> games for videogames in D?
>
> What about the GC? Wouldn't that be a bottleneck or it would be
> without GC?
Wasn't Manu one of the people who pushed for @nogc and eventually got it
in?
Yes, @nogc is totally my meddling, and it's a very valuable tool!
If only we could get a robust ARC solution over the line... ;)
Outside the realtime code though, GC can be useful. It's not bad the language has GC, but it would be nice if @nogc existed much earlier so there was a better culture of writing libraries to support it. Most libraries I've written recently work with or without GC.