-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sep 19, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Brian Quinlan wrote:
> Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote: >> Brian Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>>> Reference counting is inefficient, doesn't by itself handle cycles, >>>> and is impractical to combine with threads which run in >>>> parallel. The >>>> general consensus of modern language implementations is that a >>>> tracing >>>> GC is the future. >>> How is reference counting inefficient? > > Do somehow know that tracing GC would be more efficient for typical > python programs or are you just speculating? Also, what does "efficient" mean here? Overall program run time? No user-discernible pauses in operation? Stinginess in overall memory use? There are a lot of different efficiency parameters to consider, and of course different applications will care more about some than others. A u/i-based tool doesn't want noticeable pauses. A long running daemon wants manageable and predictable memory utilization. Etc. - -Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBRRAWfHEjvBPtnXfVAQJ2oQP/UtBlUbCb74YfnmR6ueyL/DAxe0yT5sK6 0i1bqcStZeTsub1Hor0xYQ8VDTL38lR6L446vw5WehEmaDkK0v5zreNHCEYvaqFC 3nWm/xC9NUFJrONX+YzkBLOuEpW0g08imOsbgPdvEREopvsS5kJ4e9TrNeS+fRu8 x8CIY3r5Vm0= =d/HI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
