www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - A feature request

reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=c2=de=d3=c2=b8=d5?= <yonggangluo hotmail.com> writes:
I recommend that in D2 add a new keyword gcnew for garbage collection heap
allocation.    the default new and delete key word just for someone that want
management the memory by themselves.
I think we just using new for garbage collection memory allocation and for
someone that using new for memory management by themeselvs will misleading!
Jun 26 2008
next sibling parent bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
¸ Wrote:
 I recommend that in D2 add a new keyword gcnew for garbage collection heap
allocation.    the default new and delete key word just for someone that want
management the memory by themselves.
 I think we just using new for garbage collection memory allocation and for
someone that using new for memory management by themeselvs will misleading!
In D the "default" is generally the safer way (that here is the GC way), this allows the programmer to put less bugs in the code. Bye, bearophile
Jun 27 2008
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Yonggang Luo <yonggangluo hotmail.com> writes:
bearophile Wrote:

 ¸ Wrote:
 I recommend that in D2 add a new keyword gcnew for garbage collection heap
allocation.    the default new and delete key word just for someone that want
management the memory by themselves.
 I think we just using new for garbage collection memory allocation and for
someone that using new for memory management by themeselvs will misleading!
In D the "default" is generally the safer way (that here is the GC way), this allows the programmer to put less bugs in the code. Bye, bearophile
Yes, gc is more safe, but also there is a keyword delete, is there any conflic here? I don't know if there conflict here. If I alloca memory space by gc, and delete it by hand, is there any conflict will happen?
Jul 07 2008
next sibling parent Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
Yonggang Luo wrote:
 bearophile Wrote:
 
 ¸ Wrote:
 I recommend that in D2 add a new keyword gcnew for garbage collection heap
allocation.    the default new and delete key word just for someone that want
management the memory by themselves.
 I think we just using new for garbage collection memory allocation and for
someone that using new for memory management by themeselvs will misleading!
In D the "default" is generally the safer way (that here is the GC way), this allows the programmer to put less bugs in the code. Bye, bearophile
Yes, gc is more safe, but also there is a keyword delete, is there any conflic here? I don't know if there conflict here. If I alloca memory space by gc, and delete it by hand, is there any conflict will happen?
No. It will work fine.
Jul 07 2008
prev sibling parent bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Yonggang Luo:
 Yes, gc is more safe, but also there is a keyword delete, is there any conflic
here? I don't know if there conflict here. If I alloca memory space by gc, and
delete it by hand, is there any conflict will happen?
In a reference counting GC the detele isn't a way to delete memory by hand, it tells the GC to remove a (hard) refence to some memory. Later the GC can really remove the memory only if there aren't references to it left (this is in a reference counting GC, but in other GCs the final results are similar). Bye, bearophile
Jul 07 2008
prev sibling parent "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
"¸" <yonggangluo hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:g41tbc$3d4$1 digitalmars.com...
 I recommend that in D2 add a new keyword gcnew for garbage
 collection heap allocation.    the default new and delete key word
 just for someone that want management the memory by themselves.
 I think we just using new for garbage collection memory allocation
 and for someone that using new for memory management by themeselvs
 will misleading!
If you want C++, you know where to find it. If people are thinking in C++ while programming in D, they shouldn't. Changing D's new/delete to be for manual memory management would break nearly every D project ever conceived. Besides, such a change would make it appear that the 'normal' way of managing memory in D is manually, and GC is the alternative. Quite the opposite of the way D is designed. Besides, even if we did have this, would it: - be just syntactic sugar for malloc/free? - allocate on a third heap, besides the malloc heap and the GC heap? - allocate on the same heap as GC memory, but with a flag not to GC it? - something else? Stewart. -- My e-mail address is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.
Jul 15 2008