On Thursday, 9 January 2014 at 06:11:58 UTC, Manu wrote:
On 9 January 2014 13:08, Walter Bright
<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
On 1/8/2014 12:23 PM, Benjamin Thaut wrote:
Additionaly programming with a GC often leads to a lot more
allocations,
I believe that this is incorrect. Using GC leads to fewer
allocations,
because you do not have to make extra copies just so it's
clear who owns
the allocations.
You're making a keen assumption here that C programmers use
STL. And no
sane programmer that I've ever worked with uses STL precisely
for this
reason :P
Sadly, being conscious of eliminating unnecessary copies in
C/C++ takes a
lot of work (see: time and money), so there is definitely value
in
factoring that problem away, but the existing GC is broken.
Until it
doesn't leak, stop the world, and/or can run incrementally, it
remains no
good for realtime usage.
There were 2 presentations on improved GC's last year, why do
we still have
the lamest GC imaginable? I'm still yet to hear any proposal on
how this
situation will ever significantly improve...
*cough* ARC...
For it to be done properly, RC needs to be compiler assisted,
otherwise it is just too slow.
--
Paulo
