read() performance - Linux.too?

[Unknown W. Brackets]

Yes, that's what I meant.  You'd remove the range of memory from 
scanning, but keep the root.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks,
-[Unknown]


> On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 15:15:24 +1000, Derek Parnell 
> <derek at nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 22:02:31 -0700, Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, I believe it's just:
>>>
>>> import std.gc;
>>>
>>> // ...
>>>
>>> ubyte[] data = new ubyte[1024 * 1024];
>>> std.gc.removeRange(data);
>>>
>>> This tells it, afaik, not to scan the described range for pointers.  It
>>> seems to me entirely possible that the compiler could automatically
>>> generate this code for new ubyte[] and such calls.
>>
>> Yes, but wouldn't that RAM be deallocated only at program end? If you
>> wanted it deallocated earlier you would still have to delete it.
> 
> The range pointed at by the array 'data' shouldn't be scanned, but there 
> is no reason the array reference itself cannot be scanned and therefore 
> collected, right? And if the array reference is collected, the data will 
> be freed, just not scanned for other pointers, right?
> 
> Regan
>