On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 08:59:49 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote:
On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 08:36:49 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
Yes, but they don't allow low level programming. Go also freeze to sync threads this has a rather profound impact on code generation. They have spent a lot of effort on sync instructions in code gen to lower the latency AFAIK.

So, much of the difficulty in bringing low-latency GC to dlang would be the large code gen changes required. If it is a really big effort then that is all we need to know. Not worth it until we can see a big payoff and have more resources.

Well, you could in theory avoid putting owning pointers on the stack/globals or require that they are registered as gc roots. Then you don't have to scan the stack. All you need then is write barriers. IIRC

'shared' with teeth?


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

Reply via email to