On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 04:33:07PM -0000, Peter Gibbs wrote: > These changes do cause a slight performance degradation, but I believe it is > worth it for the overall simplification of transparent protection of the > newborn. > Performance can only be a secondary goal, after correct behaviour.
What level of performance are we aiming at? It seems to me that memory allocation is already quite slow. So, I find it worrying that this change make it noticably slower. Another point to consider is that if we start to write code that assumes that newborns are not garbage collected, then it will hard to fix this code later if this turns out to be too costly. -- Jerome
