On Monday, 26 April 2021 at 09:22:12 UTC, evilrat wrote:>
On Monday, 26 April 2021 at 06:35:25 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:>
On Sunday, 25 April 2021 at 19:41:39 UTC, russhy wrote:> >
We already have zig and rust, adding yet another fancy slick no GC landuage is dead end.
Same defeatist mentality i keep reading here, this is not what D need>
So please stop your no-GC whine. People already heard you, more than once too.
I will never stop fighting for D from the people who wants to ruin it with more GC
D is open source, you are free to take care of your special flavoured D.
There is already Volt language, and Odin and Zig languages which is very D inspired and "simple" compared to D, there is a lot to choose from.
But Take GC from D and you get C2 language (guess where it is now? oh I've heard they given up and started C3 language which is even better than C2, fantastic!), and there was even more "simple" C-- (C minus minus) language, but can you guess where it is now?
Or maybe he want to repeat Python 2 vs 3 story? That was almost killed entire language. D just can't afford switching direction amid its course. But what if this really necessary? Ok, why not, just put it under a new name. But don't touch the original.
That guy teaches us about how bad GC is and provides nonsensical examples of how brave developers avoid GC by all means because of just how evil it is, meanwhile Unity have been working just fine on mobile for 10+ years, and UE4 works just fine (CPU performance wise) on average 4 years old smartphone.
I also like how he hijacked the thread and expects answers from Walter and Andrey who never showed up in the thread. He demands from them make something because he wanted it.
That's definitely not going to work.
If he is so serious about reducing GC dependency he could probably start patching phobos with no-GC functionality to be on par, that would be at least useful, but in the long run it will just add clutter, technical debt and bloat(omg!).
To make phobos usable with @nogc it would need some serious rethinking, research and planning. It is not just "remove GC" and done, this will require adding monads and stuff, pattern matching, and more. The result will probably end up look like Rust too.
Again, this shows how little you know
UE4 GC is fine if you make a hello world, ask every studios what they have to do to workaround the GC, they wish it didn't exist, and Epic is working on ditching the GC with their upcoming data oriented stack, just like Unity is working on ditching the GC with their HPC#/Burst solutions
So little do you know that it makes people believe GC is fine
This is why we can't have nice things, and this is why people are coming up with new languages instead of embracing Dlang, you guys make bad press for D, you are not pragmatic enough
and i never said ditch the GC, you do what ever you want, but the language shouldn't expect you to use a GC, it should expect you to provide what ever allocator is proper for the task