To my knowledge, most of these are pretty accurate, but there are some errors that stand out to me:<p>* BASIC string handling does not require garbage collection (in the sense used by all the other languages) because there&#x27;s no aliasing. What many BASIC implementations referred to as garbage collection was to my knowledge simply heap compaction.<p>* COBOL programmers do not normally use ALLOCATE and FREE, but instead map records directly with READ ... KEY and WRITE.<p>* Common-Lisp as a specification doesn&#x27;t require garbage collection. Lisp doesn&#x27;t require garbage collection. See for example Baker&#x27;s Linear Lisp. While most lisps are garbage-collected, Python (for example) differentiates different &quot;dialects&quot; of python so I would think it makes sense to do it here.<p>* Java has many implementations, some of which allows garbage collection to be disabled.<p>* Perl also supports a &quot;last ditched effort&quot; buffer which can be used to recover from out of memory errors ($^M) which is useful.<p>* Smalltalk uses the term &quot;automatic memory management&quot; which I think can include reference counting, but Smalltalk doesn&#x27;t (easily) support reference counting. It should say garbage collection. Garbage Collection may be Automatic Memory Management, but Automatic Memory Management isn&#x27;t (necessarily) Garbage Collection.<p>Another issue I have is that C uses its space for editorialising, and this seems wrong.<p>Those errors are possible any time the programmer manages memory directly, and are easy to avoid with a number of simple techniques. It is in fact the &quot;standard memory management&quot; (malloc&#x2F;free) and single-heap core that is horrible and (in my opinion) most contributory to those bugs. More opinion: the worst part about C is the self-hating and reluctant C programmers (followed shortly by the ones that don&#x27;t program in C anymore).