On 8/9/2020 1:20 AM, wanp...@gmail.com wrote:
One more thing which bothers me is if I put a (collect-garbage) in
front of the testing, I got gc time: 0 if not I got gc time: 9.
Why can't 1 gc reclaim all memory during execution while it can before
executes?
Those numbers show *time* spent
Thanks, that make sense!
One more thing which bothers me is if I put a (collect-garbage) in front of
the testing, I got gc time: 0 if not I got gc time: 9.
Why can't 1 gc reclaim all memory during execution while it can before
executes?
Sam Tobin-Hochstadt 在 2020年8月5日 星期三下午11:44:21 [UTC+8] 的信中寫
On 8/8/2020 9:45 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Sat, 8 Aug 2020 03:32:57 -0400, George Neuner wrote:
>
> On 8/8/2020 1:55 AM, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
> > I even saw people doing `collect-garbage` three times, just to be safe
> > I guess. And yet theoretically it's not guaranteed that thin
At Sat, 8 Aug 2020 03:32:57 -0400, George Neuner wrote:
>
> On 8/8/2020 1:55 AM, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
> > I even saw people doing `collect-garbage` three times, just to be safe
> > I guess. And yet theoretically it's not guaranteed that things will be
> > claimed back properly.
> >
> >
I should have read the question better, sorry.
It might be the hyperliterate #lang that plays badly with typed racket. Try
annotating the (define ...) inline and see if that works.
--
Linus Björnstam
On Sat, 8 Aug 2020, at 08:45, greadey wrote:
> It is not wrong, if you type the annotation
On 8/8/2020 1:55 AM, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
I even saw people doing `collect-garbage` three times, just to be safe
I guess. And yet theoretically it's not guaranteed that things will be
claimed back properly.
Honestly, there should be a function that does this `collect-garbage`
unti
6 matches
Mail list logo
