BCS wrote:
Hello Andrei,
BCS wrote:
Also there is one thing that -nogc would have over what you are
talking about; you could use it on some modules and not others. If I
have some performance critical code where attempting to use the GC
would break it's perf contract, I can put it in it's own module and
compile just it with -nogc and then link it in with code that does
use the GC.
Meh. This has been discussed in the C++ standardization committee, and
it gets really tricky real fast when you e.g. use together several
libraries, each with its own view of memory management. My impression:
don't.
Why would having one chunk of code get checked for calls to the GC and
another not be any more complicated than mixing
malloc/free+add/removeRoot with normal GC? I'm beginning to wonder if
I'm calling for something different than other people are.
What I'm thinking of would have zero effect on the generated code, the
only effect it would have is to cause an error when some code would
normally attempt to invoke the GC.
It's much more complicated than that. What if a library returns an
object or an array to another library?
Memory allocation strategy is a cross-cutting concern.
Andrei
