Re: [boost] discussion of garbage collection in C++

Subject: Re: [boost] discussion of garbage collection in C++
From: Andreas Masur (amasur_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-28 09:30:55

On Apr 26, 2009, at 2:57 AM, Raindog wrote:

>>
>> .Net, Java, Python, Perl, Ruby, D et al automatically provide GC.
> 8 of the top 10 languages in use today, according to http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html 
> , provide GC. I think my statement about what the majority of  
> programmers prefer still stands. I'm not trying to say however that  
> GC is best/better than RAII etc, or that the languages with GC are  
> somehow better than C++. I do however think that the "ez mode"  
> programming that GC'd environments provided appeals to a larger  
> number of programmers than does C++. C++ is an expert friendly  
> language for many reasons and one would be naive to think that one's  
> profession is filled with experts.

Well...while the table outlines that the majority of languages  
currently used are rather supported by a GC, I would not necessarily  
derive the same conclusion. I am a big believer of the 'Choose the  
right tool for the job at hand' idiom. And even though the  
availability of a GC is somewhat a criteria sometimes, it is usually  
not in my experience - at least not for these languages.

Same may apply to the given 8 languages as well....the table does not  
indicate whether the languages are popular because of the GC.  
Furthermore, it does not outline how many programmers actually dislike  
the GC but have to deal with it since it comes with the language. In a  
sense these kind of tables usually show the usage of languages based  
on the current business needs rather than based on a technical level.

This is certainly only my opinion though....

Ciao, Andreas