On 6/17/2014 4:23 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/16/2014 10:30 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
is this a cost that would *always* be paid,
Yes.
I've probably written 30+ posts explaining this again and again. Nobody
believes me. I beg you to write some code and disassemble it and see for
yourself.
It's not that I don't believe you, I guess I must have just missed a lot
of those posts, or probably glanced through them too quickly. I'm more
interested in this topic now than I was before, so I'm just trying to
get up to speed (so to speak). I'll try to look up those posts again
before I end up asking them to be repeated.
Keep in mind, for people in certain areas, the allure of a memory
management system with no/minimal collection pauses, minimized memory
requirements and good behavior in low-memory conditions (even if it all
comes with a non-trivial overall performance cost and a little bit of
care here and there) can be VERY strong. So, FWIW, that's the
perspective where all this is coming from.
