On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 05:29:37 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:
On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 05:16:26 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
How difficult would it be to add a, selectable, low-latency GC to dlang?

Is it closer to "we cant get there from here" or "no big deal if you already have the low-latency GC in hand"?

I've heard Walter mention performance issues (write barriers IIRC). I'm also interested in the GC-flavor performance trade offs but here I'm just asking about feasibility.

The only reasonable option for D is single threaded GC or ARC.

It has to be either some kind of heavily customisable small GC (i.e. with our resources the GC cannot please everyone), or arc. The GC as it is just hurts the language.

Realistically, we probably need some kind of working group or at least serious discussion to really narrow down where to go in the future. The GC as it is now must go, we need borrowing to work with more than just pointers, etc.

The issue is that it can't just be done incrementally, it needs to be specified beforehand.

              • Re:... Ola Fosheim Grostad via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Ola Fosheim Grostad via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Bruce Carneal via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... IGotD- via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Ola Fosheim Grostad via Digitalmars-d-learn
            • Re: low... Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Ola Fosheim Grostad via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Bruce Carneal via Digitalmars-d-learn
              • Re:... Ola Fosheim Grostad via Digitalmars-d-learn
    • Re: low-latency GC Max Haughton via Digitalmars-d-learn
  • Re: low-latency GC oddp via Digitalmars-d-learn
  • Re: low-latency GC oddp via Digitalmars-d-learn

Reply via email to