> and I think other criteria are far more important. I'm completely comfortable 
> with not supporting microsecond trading applications, and I'm reasonably 
> confident, given some conversations with Tim Sweeney, that the game examples 
> you cite can be solved.

woah, can i hire you and him? (i know who both of you are, so i know i
can't, so i'm just kidding of course.) still, these are the domains
*i* care about! games! gc for the cilent side, i'd like that.

one small thing i'd like to interject: personally i think i *get* both
sides of this debate: i *want* gc, but i also *hate* the gc's i've
experienced in clients to date. there's research that in theory could
reduce the suck, but i dunno if/when that will ever get into the
mainstream.

so i do think the theory is nice, but the practical realities to date
have torpedoed the theory. is it just that developers don't know how
to be careful with gc?

like, gc sucks especially hard when the memory gets too tight. there's
got to be some factor 2x, 4x, whateverX more free memz to keep the gc
from thrashing, it would seem. so (a) getting that factor down would
be nice. but (b) nobody knows how much their program will demand until
they run it, so we're a bit in the dark. there's a paper or two about
statically predicting how much memory your program will demand, so
that you can try to make sure it "fits" nicely inside a given
machine's heap / so you can pre-purchase the extra dram sticks to make
sure it all plays well. (of course, harder to do that in a
multi-concurrent-app resource-constrained mobile-esque setting.)
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to