Am 08.09.2012 14:47, schrieb Alex Rønne Petersen:
On 08-09-2012 08:44, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Am 08.09.2012 03:56, schrieb Tyler Jameson Little:
This issue on bugzilla hasn't been updated since July 2011, but
it's assigned to Sean Kelly:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3463
I've found these threads concerning a precise GC:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/learn/Regarding_the_more_precise_GC_35038.html
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/How_can_I_properly_import_functions_from_gcx_in_object.di_171815.html
Is this issue obsolete, or is it being worked on?
Reason being, I'm writing a game in D and I plan to write it in
nearly 100% D (with the exception being OpenGL libraries and the
like), but I know I'll run into problems with the GC eventually.
If this is an active project that may get finished in the
relative near term (less than a year), then I'd feel comfortable
knowing that eventually problems may go away.
I want to eventually make this work with ARM (Raspberry PI &
cubieboard), and the GC is a major blocker here (well, and a
cross-compiler, but I'll work that out when I get there).
I'm using dmd atm if that matters.
Thanks!
Jameson
About a year ago I have been at the same point then you are now, and
afterwars I tell you that you should write your project without a GC
from the start. See my article about this:
http://3d.benjamin-thaut.de/?p=20
GCs are usually not very good for games, unless you have a concurrent
generational incremental non stop the world GC like .Net 4 (Which they
created only for XNA 4)
Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut
You can't be incremental /and/ concurrent non-STW.
You can, they have multiple pools of memory, some of them are scanned
concurrently and the big one incremental.
Kind Regards
Benjamin Thaut
