Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-12 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Andy Wingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Some benchmarking would be really nice ;-) > > Like these for example: > > http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/will/Twobit/benchmarksAbout.html Yes, see, e.g., http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/7803 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.gui

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-11 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello, I just pushed the BDW-GC branch to Savannah: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/boehm-demers-weiser-gc The machinery and benchmarks I used are available under the `gc-benchmarks' directory: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=guile.git;a=tree;

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-11 Thread Andy Wingo
On Tue 11 Nov 2008 21:11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > I think the best we can do is keep the thing in a separate branch. Sure. > Does that seem like a reasonable plan? Some benchmarking would be really nice ;-) Like these for example: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/will/Two

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-11 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Neil! "Neil Jerram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This all sounds pretty compelling to me. From my point of view, you > and Han-Wen have the most knowledge of this area, and Han-Wen has one > of the most demanding applications - so if you and Han-Wen are happy > to go ahead, I'm happy too. G

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-10 Thread Neil Jerram
2008/11/8 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello Guilers! > > Below are some of the points (in no particular order) that IMO can make > it worthwhile to use the Boehm-Demers-Weiser GC [0] in Guile instead of > Guile's historical GC, from an engineering viewpoint. This all sounds pretty compe

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-10 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello! One more thought... [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > 3. Benefit from an all-knowing GC. While Guile's GC knows only about > the stack(s), registers and "cell heap", BDW-GC knows about all of > a process' storage: stack(s), registers, the whole heap, > thread

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-09 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm all for scrapping code; here are my concerns: > > - what is the performance impact? > > - does BDW GC handle weak references correctly? > > - What about various (undoubtedly little used) areas where GC interacts > with the interpreter: port

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-08 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Han-Wen Nienhuys escreveu: > Ludovic Courtès escreveu: >> Hello Guilers! >> >> Below are some of the points (in no particular order) that IMO can make >> it worthwhile to use the Boehm-Demers-Weiser GC [0] in Guile instead of >> Guile's historical GC, from an engineering viewpoint. >> > > I'm all

Re: Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-08 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Ludovic Courtès escreveu: > Hello Guilers! > > Below are some of the points (in no particular order) that IMO can make > it worthwhile to use the Boehm-Demers-Weiser GC [0] in Guile instead of > Guile's historical GC, from an engineering viewpoint. > I'm all for scrapping code; here are my conce

Why bother porting Guile to BDW-GC?

2008-11-08 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello Guilers! Below are some of the points (in no particular order) that IMO can make it worthwhile to use the Boehm-Demers-Weiser GC [0] in Guile instead of Guile's historical GC, from an engineering viewpoint. 1. Less code to maintain, in particular less complex and non-portable code.