some form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option for structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in program execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deallocating unused memory blocks for

some form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option for structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in program execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deallocating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory- 24 management-related bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deallocating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related 24 bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deal­ locating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory- 24 management-related bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deallocating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related 24 bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deal­ locating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related 24 bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deal­ locating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related 24 bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deal­ locating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory-management-related 24 bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deal­ locating unused memory blocks for

form of garbage collector, which makes life for the programmers much easier and avoids all the memory- 24 management-related bugs. Nim was initially designed to use a garbage collector, with an option cyclic structures. ARC and ORC may not yet provide optimal throughput compared to the older Garbage Collector, referred to as REFC. However, they avoid delayed deallocation and delays in pro­ gram execution suffice. The solution of many higher-level programming languages to this problem is a Garbage-Collector (GC). The GC does the dangerous and inconvenient task of deallocating unused memory blocks for