On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 10:14:07 UTC, dennis luehring
wrote:
Am 09.01.2013 11:09, schrieb Mehrdad:
On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 10:07:42 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Reference counting tend to create big pauses when deallocating
as objects tends to dies in group.
I don't get it... it's slower to deallocate a bunch of objects
together with refcounting than to deallocate all of them
individually over a longer period of time?
could be - think of an large hierarchy of objects which tends
to take some time to deconstruct ... a background gc could be
better for your application speed in this situation - by the
cost of smaller pause and more resource usage
Come to think of it, C++ allocators are meant for exactly this:
throwing away an entire batch of objects in 1 go. Beats GCs any
day.
or better - what is the real reason for Java and C# for using
garbage collectors if ref-counting will be always better
(except cyclic stuff)?
Pretty sure the only reason C#/Java use a GC _is_ for cyclic
stuff, and that's it.
If you have any other reasons please show me a benchmark that
shows a GC being faster than the equivalent refcounted code (I've
seen lots of talks in theory about how it _COULD_ be different
but never seen any examples in practice; would love to see one).
