Leandro Lucarella <> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |

--- Comment #122 from Leandro Lucarella <> 2011-04-14 20:06:11 
PDT ---
(In reply to comment #121)
> (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.

You mean like this one (except it's not optimized for small heaps, just for
small pauses and works)?

PS: Yeah, for some reason I still get the e-mails even when I removed myself
from te Cc =/

Configure issuemail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to