Subj : Re: OO compilers and efficiency To : comp.programming From : Flavius Vespasianus Date : Sat Jul 23 2005 05:45 am "Ed Prochak" wrote in news:1122051641.933727.255340@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > I for one thought that GC was a stupid idea. It makes the OO > programmers lazy. Notice the path we have gone on. - C was completely and totally FOXTROT UNIFORMED when it came to arrays and strings. - Because of this, C programmers had to make excessive use of direct dynamic memory calls. - In order to maintain compatibility with C, C++ mimics this. - Dynamic memory is a problem in programming so people find the need to create programming languages based upon C++ with GC. In general, programmers should program to clean up what the create but C forced you to create with unnecessary abandon. Yeh, for SIMPLE things GC might be better for inexperienced programmers who are likely to screw up free/malloc, new/delete. For more complicated applications, GC is most often inappropriate. Some day, if I have the time, I'd like to run tests on Java's garbage collector. Does anyone know if it can handle lost cyclic graphs? (Many GCs can't). .