On 25 May 2013 15:29, deadalnix <deadal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 05:18:12 UTC, Manu wrote: > >> On 25 May 2013 15:00, deadalnix <deadal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 01:56:42 UTC, Manu wrote: >>> >>> Understand, I have no virtual-memory manager, it won't page, it's not a >>>> performance problem, it will just crash if I mis-calculate this value. >>>> >>>> >>> So the GC is kind of out. >>> >>> >> Yeah, I'm wondering if that's just a basic truth for embedded. >> Can D implement a ref-counting GC? That would probably still be okay, >> since >> collection is immediate. >> >> > This is technically possible, but you said you make few allocations. So > with the tax on pointer write or the reference counting, you'll pay a lot > to collect very few garbages. I'm not sure the tradeoff is worthwhile. >
But it would be deterministic, and if the allocations are few, the cost should be negligible. Paradoxically, when you create few garbage, GC are really goos as they > don't need to trigger often. But if you need to add a tax on each reference > write/copy, you'll probably pay more tax than you get out of it. They're still non-deterministic though. And unless (even if?) they're precise, they might leak. What does ObjC do? It seems to work okay on embedded hardware (although not particularly memory-constrained hardware). Didn't ObjC recently reject GC in favour of refcounting?
