On 2013-05-31 06:02:20 +0000, Rainer Schuetze <r.sagita...@gmx.de> said:
On 30.05.2013 22:59, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
One possible complication: memory block operations would have to treat
pointer fields differently somehow.
Would they? Shouldn't it be possible to make this part of the post-blit
constructor?
Not in general, e.g. reference counting needs to know the state before
and after the copy.
No. Reference counting would work with post-blit: you have the pointer,
you just need to increment the reference count once. Also, if you're
moving instead of copying there's no post-blit called but there's also
no need to change the reference count so it's fine.
What wouldn't work with post-blit (I think) is a concurrent GC, as the
GC will likely want to be notified when pointers are moved. Post-blit
doesn't help there, and the compiler currently assumes it can move
things around without calling any function.
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michelf.ca
http://michelf.ca/
