On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 01:47:44PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > I've not made any promises as to what type of GC system we'll use. I'm > gearing things towards a copying collector, but I'm also trying to make > sure we don't lock ourselves out of a generational scheme. I'd really like to hear that you were planning on not locking us out of /any/ scheme. I'd like to see a lot of pluggablity here, so we can get custom solutions for those needing multiprocessor, huge memory optimized schemes, and with tiny machines with poor processors, or on a handheld with tiny memory. Hell, even segmented memory, if they're really brave.
> I know things are a little fuzzy in the GC arena, but that's on purpose for > the moment. Hell. I've got very, very little knowlage about gc. But I'd love to see the GC pluggable to the point where different modules can have different GCs... but I don't think it's reasonably possible. Without doubt, there should be a way for parrot code to modify the properties of the GC, like the frequency of calling, and to specify "run the GC now". -=- James Mastros
