Alas, having no garbage collector at all is a blissful state of simplicity when performance matters. It's not very difficult to clean up one's objects manually in a well-thought-out codebase.
What I'm getting at is, Rust is the only modern language (in vogue at the moment) that does not use garbage collection. It would be nice if more languages didn't require a garbage collector but gave the option to use one.
If there are some more of such languages please chime in and provide a link to them! :)
Not really, as it doesn't allow/collect cycles.
> without the performance degradation
Only for single-threaded code.
I agree with the rest of your comment!
There are different kind of smart pointers and you gotta think what you want to do with them. A GC is easier.
In an ideal world, garbage collector makes sense because we don't want to have to worry about life-cycle management when we are solving other problems. Memory management can indeed be an annoying implementation detail, but as it stands there are certainly limiting factors in hardware which are impacted by generic object-management for specific application domains.
Which in real life means a single developer ownership codebase.
> in real life
They rather pay for outsourced consultants that deliver something that works within a fixed price contract.
(Small) teams of high quality engineers do exist, but are very expensive.
Given the rarity of a well thought out codebase, I'd say it is. As soon as multiple people work on something confusion always ensues.