More embarrassing microbenchmars for D's GC.

[Sean Kelly]

dsimcha Wrote:

> == Quote from Rounin (davidjo at student.matnat.uio.no)'s article
> > Complicating the code by avoiding associative arrays isn't really an option,
> > though, as the whole point of writing the program was comparing D to Python in
> > terms of simplicity.
> 
> How about using a library defined associative array?  As I've mentioned several
> times here before, D's current builtin associative array implementation interacts
> horribly with the GC.  This is true both in terms of speed and memory usage.
> Neither D's GC nor its AA implementation is that bad per se, but the AA
> implementation seems to expose all the weaknesses in the GC, such that the result
> when using large AAs is laughably bad.  I think eventually we need to completely
> redesign and rewrite it, or at least put a sealed implementation in std.container
> that's more geared towards huge AAs.

The precise scanning patch would probably help tremendously here.