[cap-talk] Specs for our 'ideal' language?

[Raoul Duke]

> I have seen major problem arising from non deterministic ordering of
> implicit and deferred destruction. Maybe explicit GC is not what is needed
> to solve it, implicit and deferred destruction can be the source of nasty
> problems. Possibly what is needed is non deferred implicit GC? If so, how
> do memory safe languages do in that area?

if i get what you are saying, i think most anybody who has done Real
Work with currently available GC'd languages would agree: they fail
pretty badly to let us handle resources other than memory well; one
has to be entirely too manually explicit, and the ASCII becomes
complex, and complexity leads to bugs. i don't understand why RAII
can't and hasn't been better supported yet.

sincerely.