• MGW (10/10) Aug 09 2017 Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is being
• Adam D. Ruppe (5/7) Aug 09 2017 Not really, it operates in an undefined sequence... just whenever
• Guillaume Piolat (2/12) Aug 09 2017 https://p0nce.github.io/d-idioms/#The-trouble-with-class-destructors
• Swoorup Joshi (3/16) Aug 09 2017 Is garbage collection even useful besides managing memory?
• Meta (2/3) Aug 09 2017 Managing memory is GC's raison d'être.
• 12345swordy (4/21) Aug 09 2017 That is like saying "Is fire even useful besides heating things
• Johnson Jones (3/20) Aug 09 2017 Of course! Once a week it is useful! Else things start piling up
• Guillaume Piolat (4/5) Aug 10 2017 GC has the unique advantage of being a global owner, hence
• Joseph5 (1/1) Sep 24 2017 Hmmm. Find some useful information here.

MGW <mgw yandex.ru> writes:

Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is being 
completed in GC operates in FIFO sequence.
Is there a possibility to shift GC memory deallocation to LIFO 
mode?

It`s connected with the fact that GUI library (Qt) creates 
QApplication first,
but GC destroys this object first when an application is being 
completed. This leads to the application failure.
If the sequence of memory deallocation on LIFO is shifted, it 
will essentially simplify the cooperation with C++ libraries.

Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 13:46:29 UTC, MGW wrote:
 Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is being 
 completed in GC operates in FIFO sequence.

Not really, it operates in an undefined sequence... just whenever 
it gets around to it in scans.

If destruction order is important, you should use RAII or 
explicit destruction...

Guillaume Piolat <contact spam.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 13:46:29 UTC, MGW wrote:
 Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is being 
 completed in GC operates in FIFO sequence.
 Is there a possibility to shift GC memory deallocation to LIFO 
 mode?

 It`s connected with the fact that GUI library (Qt) creates 
 QApplication first,
 but GC destroys this object first when an application is being 
 completed. This leads to the application failure.
 If the sequence of memory deallocation on LIFO is shifted, it 
 will essentially simplify the cooperation with C++ libraries.

https://p0nce.github.io/d-idioms/#The-trouble-with-class-destructors

Swoorup Joshi <swoorupjoshi gmail.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 15:47:17 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
wrote:
 On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 13:46:29 UTC, MGW wrote:
 Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is 
 being completed in GC operates in FIFO sequence.
 Is there a possibility to shift GC memory deallocation to LIFO 
 mode?

 It`s connected with the fact that GUI library (Qt) creates 
 QApplication first,
 but GC destroys this object first when an application is being 
 completed. This leads to the application failure.
 If the sequence of memory deallocation on LIFO is shifted, it 
 will essentially simplify the cooperation with C++ libraries.

 https://p0nce.github.io/d-idioms/#The-trouble-with-class-destructors

Is garbage collection even useful besides managing memory?

Meta <jared771 gmail.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 17:38:15 UTC, Swoorup Joshi wrote:
 Is garbage collection even useful besides managing memory?

Managing memory is GC's raison d'être.

12345swordy <alexanderheistermann gmail.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 17:38:15 UTC, Swoorup Joshi wrote:
 On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 15:47:17 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
 wrote:
 On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 13:46:29 UTC, MGW wrote:
 Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is 
 being completed in GC operates in FIFO sequence.
 Is there a possibility to shift GC memory deallocation to 
 LIFO mode?

 It`s connected with the fact that GUI library (Qt) creates 
 QApplication first,
 but GC destroys this object first when an application is 
 being completed. This leads to the application failure.
 If the sequence of memory deallocation on LIFO is shifted, it 
 will essentially simplify the cooperation with C++ libraries.

 https://p0nce.github.io/d-idioms/#The-trouble-with-class-destructors

 Is garbage collection even useful besides managing memory?

That is like saying "Is fire even useful besides heating things 
up?".

Alex

Johnson Jones <JJ Dynomite.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 17:38:15 UTC, Swoorup Joshi wrote:
 On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 15:47:17 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
 wrote:
 On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 13:46:29 UTC, MGW wrote:
 Memory allocation and deallocation when an application is 
 being completed in GC operates in FIFO sequence.
 Is there a possibility to shift GC memory deallocation to 
 LIFO mode?

 It`s connected with the fact that GUI library (Qt) creates 
 QApplication first,
 but GC destroys this object first when an application is 
 being completed. This leads to the application failure.
 If the sequence of memory deallocation on LIFO is shifted, it 
 will essentially simplify the cooperation with C++ libraries.

 https://p0nce.github.io/d-idioms/#The-trouble-with-class-destructors

 Is garbage collection even useful besides managing memory?

Of course! Once a week it is useful! Else things start piling up 
and getting really smelly! Not very healthy!

Guillaume Piolat <contact spam.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 17:38:15 UTC, Swoorup Joshi wrote:
 Is garbage collection even useful besides managing memory?

GC has the unique advantage of being a global owner, hence 
avoiding to encode ownership into types for memory (when you can 
use it).

Joseph5 <HarperrRodneytm yahoo.com> writes:

Hmmm. Find some useful information here.