Garbage Collection is Wrong

Very fresh (16h old at the time I wrote this comment).

Meh, GC has its uses. It helps that the vast majority of resources are indeed memory, so it makes sense to special-case.

Although in some situations it isn't acceptable and it's interesting to look at what languages like Rust do about it. It ends up guaranteeing safety, but with not much more effort than GC.

Yes, in some scenarios you can associate the lifetime of a resource with the lifetime of a storage location, but this simply does not work in all cases, probably only in a small fraction of all cases. And then? How do you handle resources that have no single obvious owner? How do you determine if the resource is still in use when you are done with it in one place? You implement some kind of reference counting? You keep the resource alive until you reach a point where you definitely know it is no longer in use? You turn your code upside down and force it into a single owner structure destroying the semantics of your code on the way?

In practice, no. People still write new and delete all the time in large C++ codebases (LLVM, Gecko, WebKit, etc. etc.)

unique_ptr is gaining traction, of course.