On Tue, 18 May 2010 11:41:08 +0100, Daniel Ruoso <dan...@ruoso.com> wrote:

Em Dom, 2010-05-16 às 19:34 +0100, nigelsande...@btconnect.com escreveu:
Interoperability with Perl 5 and
is reference counting should not be a high priority in the decision making
process for defining the Perl 6 concurrency model.

If we drop that requirement then we can simply go to the
we-can-spawn-as-many-os-threads-as-we-want model..

I do not see that as a requirement. But, I am painfully aware that I am playing catchup with all the various versions, flavours and colors of Perl6 interpreter. And more importantly, the significance of each of tehm. When I recently started following #perl6 I was blown away (and totally confused) by all the various flavours that the eval bot responded to.

The funny thing is that I have a serious soft spot for the timelyness of reference couting "GC". And I recently came across a paper on a new RCGC that claimed to address the circular reference problem without resorting to weak references or other labour intensive mechanisms; nor a stop-the-world GC cycle. I scanned the paper and it was essentially a multi-pass "coloring" scheme, but achived better performaince than most by

a) running locally (to scopes I think) so that it had far fewer arenas to scan. b) Using a invative coloring scheme that meant it was O(N) rather than the usual O(N * M)

Most of it went over my head, (as is often the case with aademic papers), but it seems real. But I think that is a boat that has long sailed for Perl 6?


Reply via email to