Is Phobos's Garbage Collector utterly broken? (Phobos vs Tango)

[kenny]

ok you convinced me... I'll switch to tango now -- or at least start heading that direction..

I use dmd 2.003 at the moment (it is fast enough for me, I guess... postgre is the slow one actually), and I noticed that it definitely doesn't work with 2.003 at all.

Another thing that's really awesome about phobos / d is that the documentation is 100% available offline. Personally, I have the worlds worst internet connection on this planet. I would definitely be needing the documentation to be available offline to be able to use tango effectively. I see some doc stuff, but it looks like css and js files (I assume that the html is generated somehow) -- but what about all of the good information on the wiki?

Other than that, I was checking out the docs and tango looks really really good. I really like the threading stuff you've got. There are so many really good features -- I'm actually pretty excited.

So here's the questions:
1. when is dmd 2.0 support? (I guess I can downgrade to dmd 1.0 for some time)
2. will all the documentation be available offline?
3. what other features are way faster than the phobos equiv?

Last thing... I really wish I had buffers and GrowBuffers right now... I could really use them for some cool stuff... They look awesome! Dang... I've been missing out. When I get converted over to tango, I'll provide before and after benchmarks.

Good work guys.

Kenny

Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 17:48:26 +0300, Sean Kelly <sean at f4.ca> wrote:
> 
>> It turns out this is because GrowBuffer uses a void[] internally to
>> store data.  The type should probably be changed to byte[].  I'll file a
>> ticket for it.
> 
> Cheers, that indeed fixed it. And now it runs much faster than the Phobos version, too!
> 
> What's the reasoning of scanning void[] - why would anyone keep pointers in a void[] since it's supposed to mean "binary non-descript data"?
>