On 4/10/12 6:11 AM, David Jeske wrote: > I do not understand the significance of your observation. AFAIK, every > currently shipping software collector, for every language system, requires > an unpredictable world-stop. If I am mis-informed, please point me to one > that does not.
Nope. For instance, the places where GC can happen are fully defined in the Glasgow Haskell Compiler. In particular, the need for GC is only checked on allocation; thus, you can write tight loops which are strict enough to guarantee no allocation and therefore no GC. It's not scalable in any sense of the word; but it is doable, and it's even predictable (if inscrutable) once you know GHC's internals. I'm sure most other industry-quality compilers have similar techniques in order to make GC pauses more predictable and/or less noticeable. -- Live well, ~wren _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
