On 04/11/13 20:09, Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
ARCs have their place, sure! But "letting it leak" isn't acceptable in
my case.
Instead, in my use case, "no deletes until the whole heap is
released" makes way more sense (heaps are small, grow a bit, and get
released). Since the lifetime of the object becomes == the lifetime of
the heap, there's no issue with cycles. There's only an issue with
multiple mutations, which like I said only needs a bit per pointer
(and a non-atomic one at that as each heap is accessed by one thread -
the only thing that gets sent between tasks is the whole heap!).
So... different use cases, different solutions. ARC is a different
trade-off. I guess the right thing to do would be to implement some
"sufficiently smart" AppendOnlyHeap<T> pointer, but this seems hard to
do (same heap can hold objects of multiple types, etc.) so for now I
have some AlmostSafeHeapPointer<T> instead :-(
Language support for heaps-separate-from-tasks would have solved it
(and a bit more)...
Is this essentially an "arena allocator" where one can transfer the
whole arena and all the objects allocated in it into another task?
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
