Smart pointers instead of GC?

Dmitry Olshansky dmitry.olsh at gmail.com
Mon Feb 3 12:40:20 PST 2014


04-Feb-2014 00:21, Adam Wilson пишет:
> On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:02:29 -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>
>> On 2/3/14, 6:57 AM, Frank Bauer wrote:
>>> Anyone asking for the addition of ARC or owning pointers to D, gets
>>> pretty much ignored. The topic is "Smart pointers instead of GC?",
>>> remember? People here seem to be more interested in diverting to
>>> nullable, scope and GC optimization. Telling, indeed.
>>
>> I thought I made it clear that GC avoidance (which includes
>> considering built-in reference counting) is a major focus of 2014.
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>
...
> Sadly, although written as hyperbole, I feel that the above is fairly
> close to the actual position of the ARC crowd.
>

I won't be surprised that half of current GC problems are because it's 
simply too stupid as an allocator. I had some numbers that I'd need to 
dig up were GC.malloc was ~2x slower then malloc even with garbage 
collection disabled.

With that said I'd focus on ref-counting somehow coexisting with tracing 
GC. It doesn't go well at the moment - try creating dynamic arrays of 
std.stdio.File (that is ref-counted).

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list