On 2/24/2015 4:41 PM, deadalnix wrote:
Why ? There is very little chance that malloc + GC.addRange becomes any faster
that GC.malloc in the first place.
1. GC is designed to do GC, which is more than malloc/free is designed to do.
Less work usually is faster.
2. There are many malloc/free implementations available, and people can and do
swap them out to find one that works best for their application. Also, compiler
vendors often expend a great deal of effort making malloc/free work well. Why
not take advantage of that? It's like it's pretty hard to compete with the
system memcpy() - people expend enormous effort on that.
To have an arbitrary sub graph be memory safe with return ref, the interface
to it will have to be constructed to only allow access by values or return refs.
That means all library code must be duplicated.
Why?
but someone already made a very good point about it there:
http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/type-qualifiers-and-wild-cards/231902461
Don't see how that applies.
