On Sep 1, 2011, at 7:57 PM, Robert Jacques wrote: > On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 11:46:32 -0400, Sean Kelly <s...@invisibleduck.org> wrote: >> Yup. I want to revisit CDGC to see if it's up to snuff as the default GC. It >> already supports precise scanning, so perhaps the rest can be sorted via >> library code: create!T(...) > > Default on *nix you mean, as CDGC sadly doesn't support windows.
It should. It just won't be able to use its fork-based speedup. That should still have it run on par with the GC we use today. If there are any actual problems running on Windows, they shouldn't be too hard to fix.
