Thought on limiting scope of GC

[tcak]

>>
>> A programmer's aim is to tell computer what to do. Purpose of 
>> GC is to help him to prevent problems. In default, AFAIK, GC 
>> considers every part of memory in case there are references in 
>> them. Well, if the time taking process is scanning all memory, 
>> programmer could tell to GC, if he/she trusts about 
>> correctness, not to scan some parts of memory to limit 
>> scanning area. Example, if I create a char array of 10,000 
>> items, why would I want GC to scan it. I won't put any object 
>> references in it for sure.
>
> This only works when you are the only guy on the team and have 
> a small codebase to visualize on your head.
>
> The moment a middle size team comes into play, it is chaos.
>
> There is a reason why manual memory managed languages have lost 
> their place on the enterprise.
>
> --
> Paulo

Many people wants to disable GC to improve performance (if there 
are other reasons, it is not included here.). If after adding new 
codes, memory problems start, just disable the 
GC-disabled-code-parts (as I exampled with that 10,000 item 
array). This way, errors will disappear and performance may 
decrease a little. Then fixing can be done to increase 
performance again.

I think enabling GC for only some parts of code is wrong. It 
should be disabling it for some parts of code. This way, if 
programmer loses control of memory, he/she can remove 
GC-disabling codes, and tada everything works correctly without 
doing any other changes.