News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:D 2.069.0 released, compiler automatically ported from C+... by AsyncAwait on Wednesday November 04, 2015 @07:47AM (#10506087)
How's the memory-safety model in D without a GC, last time I looked at it, it seemed to me that C++ 11/14 has the better model here and now with the C++ core guidelines, it may be even better.
Re:D 2.069.0 released, compiler automatically ported from C+... by pjmlp on Wednesday November 04, 2015 @10:04AM (#10507019)
Currently it still relies on the GC.

However you can write gc free code regions by marking them as @nogc and the compiler will make sure you only call code that is @nogc compatible.

Additionally, there is some ongoing discussion how to improve the language to depend less on the GC.

The C++ core guidelines are great, and me being a C++ fan even with its warts, welcome them and all the work the C++ community is doing.

However them being opt-in, relying on static analysis and the quality of the code I usually see at companies, which tends to be C with Classes from developers that don't even know what CppCon is, I am not sure how the adoption will be like.

Re:D 2.069.0 released, compiler automatically ported from C+... by slacka on Wednesday November 04, 2015 @10:12AM (#10507078)
Has the core guidelines Checker tool been released yet? For those that haven't studied the guideline intensely, I'd assume it's necessary to do any kind of real world comparison.
Re:D 2.069.0 released, compiler automatically ported from C+... by qznc on Wednesday November 04, 2015 @09:21AM (#10506660)
Could you elaborate? What about the C++ 11/14 model improves memory safety?
Re:D 2.069.0 released, compiler automatically ported from C+... by pjmlp on Wednesday November 04, 2015 @10:06AM (#10507038)
I imagine he/she means the newly introduced C++ Core Guidelines with the _prt<>() and _view() classes, and the adoption of Rust like lifetime analysis for static analysers.