On 08-09-2012 22:04, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
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

Right... but then your GC is not purely concurrent non-STW, which is what I thought you were saying. Incremental inherently implies some kind of STW, regardless of what generation we're talking about.

--
Alex Rønne Petersen
[email protected]
http://lycus.org

Reply via email to