A different, precise TLS garbage collector?

Etienne Cimon via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sun Nov 16 08:00:40 PST 2014


On 2014-11-16 10:21, Xinok wrote:
> How about immutable data which is implicitly shareable? Granted you can
> destroy/free the data asynchronously, but you would still need to check
> all threads for references to that data.

Immutable data would proxy through malloc and would not be scanned as it 
can only contain immutable data that cannot be deleted nor scanned.

This is also shared by every thread without any locking. Currently, 
immutable data is global in storage but may be local in access rights I 
think? I would have assumed it would automatically be in the .rdata 
process segments.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list