In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi all, > >Integration of Boehm's GC within Guile was discussed at length in the >past, especially back in 2000. Apparently, Han-Wen even got to the >point of having an preliminary implementation of Guile that uses it[0]. >Unfortunately the URL mentioned there is no longer valid. > >Han-Wen: Could you summarize your conclusions and maybe make your code >available as well?
it's here, http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen/public/guile/guile-boehm.gz note that this is a patch for the "old" GC code, before I took a stab at rewriting. It was a quick hack, and performance was a little worse, but I think it could be just as performant as GGC. Note that many interpreters (eg. MzScheme) use BGC by default. Also, measuring performance of GC is hard, since there is a space/time tradeoff, so you should really measure the tradeoff, something I haven't done. >More generally, do people (still) believe that Guile should use BGC? >Back then, there was apparently some consensus that it would be a Good >Thing. I think it would be good to move to BGC. BGC is used by many other interpreters, and receives more attention wrt performance and bugfixing than GGC. Dropping code is almost always good BTW, I ran across Judy trees today, http://judy.sourceforge.net/ would it be worthwhile to try replacing resizing hash tables in Guile with Judy trees? I expect that it would incur a significant speedup. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
