Thanks, that's good to know. Can you explain a little bit about why it would hurt performance?
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 8:23:34 AM UTC-7, Yichao Yu wrote: > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Chris Rackauckas <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > I see mentions like this one every once in awhile: > > > > "D language is a special case, as it has GC, but it's also optional (as > with > > Julia)" > > > > Is GC optional? > > No, Not for julia objects. > > > I thought the only way to discard something from memory was > > to set it to zero and call garbage control (which then runs the whole > > garbage control). Is there a more targeted way to delete things? > > No, Not for julia objects. > > > If it's not > > already available, it seems like it would be useful for code focusing > > performance as an option. > > This will actually **not** improve performance most of the time and > can actually hurt performance a lot. > The only case I can think of that can have better performance is > manually managing an object pool. > This might improve latency or memory usage. All of the advantage can > be obtained by improving the GC itself, which is the preferred way. > This feature will also be extremely unsafe and can break many > assumptions made in the runtime. >
