"Hans" == Hans Aberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hans> At 14:15 97/08/12, Philip Wadler wrote:
>>> I think that Java might be slow, just because of this
>>> automatic garbage collection.
>> I can't let this chestnut go unchallenged. Let's not bandy
>> about claims without evidence. GC is perfectly fine for
>> building into phone switches (via Erlang) so it can't be all
>> that slow. -- P
Hans> I am not an expert on the life and death of garbage
Hans> collectors myself; I got one of those
Hans> get-it-off-your-garbage-collector letters in the mail. :-)
All right, all right, I wrote it :-). I was just stating well known
opinions about GC/efficiency to Hans in private because I felt (very
strongly) that this topic is not relevant to the Haskell mailing list.
Seach for "Garbage Collection" on any good web search engine and you
will get lots of references. Or try the following site for a pretty
good start
http://www.lpac.ac.uk/SEL-HPC/Articles/FuncArchive.html
or even the comp.lang.functional FAQ
http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/Department/Staff/gmh/faq.html
The paper of psuedoknot should show that Haskell with GHC runs very
close to C (factor of 2) inspite of garbage collection on a very real
world problem.
Other papers on garbage collection show you how to use it with hard
real time deadlines. They will also show why GC is faster than heap
allocation if you have enough memory. These days "enough" is also
"affordable", five years ago that was not true.
All this is standard "state of the art" and has little to do with the
Haskell mailing list. This is my very first post to this mailing list,
and that is because this mailing list has always been very
focussed. Lets keep it that way :-)
If I wanted a GC flame-fest I can always read comp.lang.functional
whith a cross-post to comp.lang.c++ or something :-))
Cheers!
Shyamal
