On Sunday, 18 December 2011 at 23:13:03 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 12/18/11 4:53 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.
I think we can do a lot toward improving the footprint and
performance of a precise GC while benefitting of its innate
advantages.
Still, a more conservative GC will always outperform a more
precise one in scanning speed. Without knowing the price, it
would be unwise to jump into it without even considering the
possibility of leaving a choice.
I am not against the idea, but I believe that more research is
needed before rash decisions are taken. If the performance
penalty turns out to be insignificant, then choice would be
pointless. And if there will be a considerable performance gap,
the "burden" of choice (compiler switch/boolean runtime setting +
maintenance costs) could be worth it.
