John Carmack applauds D's pure attribute

Paulo Pinto pjmlp at progtools.org
Sat Feb 25 14:29:22 PST 2012


Am 25.02.2012 23:17, schrieb Peter Alexander:
> On Saturday, 25 February 2012 at 22:08:31 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> Am 25.02.2012 21:26, schrieb Peter Alexander:
>>> On Saturday, 25 February 2012 at 20:13:42 UTC, so wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, 25 February 2012 at 18:47:12 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Interesting. I wish he'd elaborate on why it's not an option for his
>>>>> daily
>>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> Not the design but the implementation, memory management would be the
>>>> first.
>>>
>>> Memory management is not a problem. You can manage memory just as easily
>>> in D as you can in C or C++. Just don't use global new, which they'll
>>> already be doing.
>>
>> I couldn't agree more.
>>
>> The GC issue comes around often, but I personally think that the main
>> issue is that the GC needs to be optimized, not that manual memory
>> management is required.
>>
>> Most standard compiler malloc()/free() implementations are actually
>> slower than most advanced GC algorithms.
>
> If you require realtime performance then you don't use either the GC or
> malloc/free. You allocate blocks up front and use those when you need
> consistent high performance.
>
> It doesn't matter how optimised the GC is. The eventual collection is
> inevitable and if it takes anything more than a small fraction of a
> second then it will be too slow for realtime use.
>

There are GC realtime algorithms, which are actually in use, in systems
like the French Ground Master 400 missile radar system.

There is no more realtime than that. I surely would not like that such
systems had a pause the world GC.

--
Paulo


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list