On 12/28/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, we need a finalizer. I agree that we're overthinking this a >bit, but I'd like to understand why anyone thinks this belongs in the >GC - we keep claiming to do a modular VM, yet then do things like >this... :)
We can keep the minimal finalization implementation we have now ( a single high priority finalization thread ), and wait for use cases that need more. IMHO. The finalization subsystem is currently a VM component and the VM exposes the interface ( though minimal ) to the GC. This is the right way, and does not violate modularity or GC pluggability.
