Using the fixed keyword you can prevent the collection of a memory block,
however Im not sure this is what youre looking for.
Also I fail to see how this (by itself) could possibly help with
time-critical parts.
Greetings
Andreas
_
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Hi Andreas,
thanks for this hint - nice feature.
But we want that GC does nothing while a special code block ist executed!
Thanks
Michael
Von: Andreas Nahr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Thursday, March 08, 2007 10:22 AM
An: Back, Michael (ext);
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 10:05 +0100, Back, Michael (ext) wrote:
Is it possible to stop the GC for garbage collecting for a code
block?
Simple (yet glib) answer: Don't allocate anything from the GC. If you
don't allocate GC memory, then the GC won't get involved. :-)
Sadly, this is the safest
Just my two cents,
The only reason i can think of where you'd require this kind of behaviour is
when you need real time processing and any kind of delay could be
disasterous. In this case, i wouldn't think C# would be a good choice to
implement in. What you could do is write a C program/library
AFAIK it is not possible to implement realtime applications in C#. Of
the managed languages, there's RealtimeJava (never used it) and Ada.
And both have to be run either on a specially modified Unix or on
their own micro-OS. Furthermore, I am not sure whether Ada allows GC
(opposed to explicit
On 03/08/07 Back, Michael (ext) wrote:
Is it possible to stop the GC for garbage collecting for a code block?
This would be helpful for time critical parts.
I think about something like gc_barrierer_on and gc_barrierer_off.
If such possibility doesn't exists, may be it could implemented
hello,
Is it possible to stop the GC for garbage collecting for a code
block?
This would be helpful for time critical parts.
You would have to modify the GC to expose an API that prevents it
running, then you decide what the semantics should be, but be aware that
other threads will be
