On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Sandro Magi <[email protected]> wrote:
> One possibly tangential approach: perhaps the difficulty in reconciling GC > with concurrency implies that we really ought to *integrate* object > lifetime management with concurrency primitives. For instance, a GC that's > tightly integrated with a concurrency model like concurrent revisions has > some additional liberties (no shared mutable state) that aren't available > when assuming a POSIX-like threading model (shared mutable state). > I have no objection to concurrent revisions, but I don't want to put the concurrency model on the table. Even if we find a non-standard concurrency model that we like, shared memory concurrency isn't going away and we need a scheme that works for that case. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
