manual memory management

deadalnix deadalnix at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 01:43:00 PST 2013


On Wednesday, 9 January 2013 at 09:01:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 09:54:10 Mehrdad wrote:
>> You (or Walter I guess) are the first person I've seen who 
>> calls
>> C++ garbage collected.
>
> I sure wouldn't call that garbage collection - not when there's 
> no garbage
> collector. But Walter has certainly called it that from time to 
> time.
>
> I think that the other term that Paulo just used - automatic 
> memory management
> - is far more accurate.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

I used to think that. But I was convinced otherwise when 
considering carefully the cost and benefit involved. I so no 
interest in make the difference anymore.

The technical solution you choose for GC imply some tradeoff, and 
it amazing to see how the fact that you refcount or trace don't 
matter that much. If you want a tracing collector to behave more 
like reference counting, you'll need to add barriers, so you ends 
up with the same cost to get the same benefit. Same goes for 
variations around reference counting, or any mix of both.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list