http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463
--- Comment #121 from David Simcha <[email protected]> 2011-04-14 19:59:28 PDT --- (In reply to comment #120) > I understand the advantages of a moving GC - heap compaction allowing for an > overall smaller managed heap etc., but I hope you understand that sacrificing > speed for these goals is not an unilateral improvement for everyone. Since we don't have any hard benchmarks conveniently available, let's assume for the sake of argument that a precise/moving/etc. GC would be slower. Your case is a niche case and calls for a niche garbage collector implementation. D's GC is designed (IIRC) to allow selecting an implementation at link time. Eventually, someone could write a decent low-latency GC optimized for small heaps for game programmers. In the mean time, we could fork the current one. The stock GC, though, should handle the common cases, not a few game programmers' corner case. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
