Hello Weed,
BCS ?????:
Reply to Weed,
If you know the
best way for language *without GC* guaranteeing the existence of an
object without overhead - I have to listen!
Never delete anything?
One of the arguments for GC is that it might well have /less/
overhead than any other practical way of managing dynamic memory.
Mmm
When I say "overhead" I mean the cost of executions, and not cost of
programming
So do I.
I figure unless it save me more times than it costs /all/ the users, run
time cost trumps.
Yes you can be
very careful in keeping track of pointers (not practical) or use
smart
pointers and such (might end up costing more than GC)
I am do not agree: GC overexpenditure CPU or memory. Typically, both.
ditto naryl on CPU
As for memory, unless the thing overspends into swap and does so very quickly
(many pages per second) I don't think that matters. This is because most
of the extra will not be part of the resident set so the OS will start paging
it out to keep some free pages. This is basically free until you have the
CPU or HDD locked hard at 100%. The other half is that the overhead of reference
counting and/or the like will cost in memory (you have to store the count
somewhere) and might also have bad effects regarding cache misses.
but neither is
particularly nice.
