On 12/18/2011 11:53 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Sunday, 18 December 2011 at 20:32:18 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That is an interesting opportunity. At any rate, I am 100% convinced
precise GC is the only way to go, and I think I've convinced Walter to
a good extent as well.
Sacrificing something (performance, executable size) for something else
is not an unilateral improvement.
It is an unilateral improvement if both options are kept open. I don't
see a reason to cease support for the current GC model.
Furthermore, a generational GC performs much better than a simple
mark-sweep GC.
