new D2.0 + C++ language

BCS none at anon.com
Thu Mar 19 08:58:09 PDT 2009


Hello Weed,

> BCS ?????:
> 
>> Reply to Weed,
>> 
>>> If you know the
>>> best way for language *without GC* guaranteeing the existence of an
>>> object without overhead - I have to listen!
>> Never delete anything?
>> 
>> One of the arguments for GC is that it might well have /less/
>> overhead than any other practical way of managing dynamic memory.
>> 
> Mmm
> When I say "overhead" I mean the cost of executions, and not cost of
> programming

So do I.

I figure unless it save me more times than it costs /all/ the users, run 
time cost trumps. 

>> Yes you can be
>> very careful in keeping track of pointers (not practical) or use
>> smart
>> pointers and such (might end up costing more than GC)
> I am do not agree: GC overexpenditure CPU or memory. Typically, both.

ditto naryl on CPU

As for memory, unless the thing overspends into swap and does so very quickly 
(many pages per second) I don't think that matters. This is because most 
of the extra will not be part of the resident set so the OS will start paging 
it out to keep some free pages. This is basically free until you have the 
CPU or HDD locked hard at 100%. The other half is that the overhead of reference 
counting and/or the like will cost in memory (you have to store the count 
somewhere) and might also have bad effects regarding cache misses.

> 
>> but neither is
>> particularly nice.





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list