Using D Without The GC

Posted: 2012-12-15 - Link

One of the major selling points of the D Programming Language is its “native efficiency”. I use the scare quotes because while D compilers do compile down to native machine code, your program will only run efficiently if you code with performance in mind!

In D, the easiest way to degrade performance (besides poor algorithms) is overuse of automatic memory managment. No matter what language you use, memory allocation is non-trivial, and has a non-trivial cost to go with it. With D’s automatic memory management, you not only incur the cost of allocation, but also the cost of automatic deallocation, i.e. garbage collection. If you want high throughput and low latency then you really need to avoid memory allocation as much as possible.

The most important thing to understand about the GC is that it can only run when you try to allocate. Unfortunately D doesn’t make it obvious when you are allocating memory, so I’ve listed the most common ways here.

Things That Allocate in D

Before I start, I should make it clear that these are things that could allocate in D. A good optimiser may be able to remove some of the allocations. When in doubt, test.


Any time you use the new keyword, you are allocating memory. Avoid creating class instances frequently, and use structs where possible.

Array literals

In most cases, array literals will allocate.

immutable int[3] a = [1, 2, 3];  // Won't allocate
immutable int[] b = [1, 2, 3];   // Will allocate once
int[] c = [1, 2, 3];             // Will allocate
int[3] d = [1, 2, 3];            // Will allocate
foo([1, 2, 3]);                  // Will allocate

The fact that the initialisation of d allocates may be surprising. It doesn’t need to, but DMD currently doesn’t do the optimisation to remove the allocation. In the meantime, you can do this:

immutable int[3] a = [1, 2, 3];  // Won't allocate
int[3] b = a;                    // Won't allocate

Calling dup or idup on an array will also lead to an allocation.

Array concatenation

Array concatenation won’t always result in an allocation, as arrays are sometimes over-allocated, but if you want to avoid allocations then it is best to avoid array concatenation. Modifying the .length property of an array could also cause allocation.

Associative arrays

Creating, adding, or removing elements from an associative array could cause an allocation. Lookups are safe.


A closure is a function reference that needs extra context beyond the stack. An example should illustrate this:

int delegate() foo(int x) { return () => x; }
int delegate() bar(int x) { return () => 1; }

Here, foo returns a closure because the returned function relies on the value of x, which will no longer be on the stack after foo returns. bar, on the other hand, does not return a closure, because the function () => 1 has no dependency on x.

In D, creating a closure allocates memory, i.e. every time you call foo you will allocate memory.

Detecting Allocations

The easiest way to detect unexpected allocations is to add some logging to the D runtime. Clone that project, and open up src/gc/gc.d. In there, there’s some functions with names like gc_malloc, gc_calloc, etc. Just add some calls to printf there, and build.


When you try to avoid using the GC, you might find that your usual style of programming doesn’t work very well. If you are used to just building up arrays using concatenation, joining strings together, and creating lots of temporary objects then you’re going to have a hard time.

In general, to avoid these dynamic allocations, you need to make your program more static. Static arrays in particular are your friend. You’ll have to build hard limits into your code, and just “allocate” within those limits.

Using strings can be quite tricky when you want to avoid allocations. string in D is an alias for immutable(char)[], which is fine when you know what your string needs to contain beforehand, but if you want to create a string based on runtime data then you’ll need to build it up inside a char[N], which has no legal conversion to immutable(char)[].

To get around the string problem, you can use assumeUnique. This is a simple function that does nothing more than cast a mutable array to an immutable array. The caveat is that the cast is only safe if the reference is truly unique. Once you have built up your string in the mutable array, and casted using assumeUnique, you can’t safely use the mutable array again. This shouldn’t be a problem, but it’s something to be aware of.

char[16] buf;
snprintf(buf.ptr, buf.length, "1 + 1 = %d", 1 + 1);
string str = assumeUnique(buf[]);


While D was designed with GC use in mind, the language also provides all the necessary abstraction facilities to build usable “GC free” libraries (templates, aliases, delegates, static arrays). It can take a while to get used to not using the GC, but I certainly don’t feel hindered by its absence.

comments powered by Disqus