Hi, I was reading with interest the proposal on library-defined garbage collection (by use of dedicated types), and I have a couple of questions.
My main worry, and thus question, is how to handle cross-scheme cycles ? There does not seem to be anything preventing me to have a Rc<Object> reference a Gc<Object> (and vice-versa), and I am wondering how garbage collectors are supposed to cooperate to realize that those may be dead cycles to collect. As such, I am wondering if despite being neat (and highly tunable) users might not be satisfied with a simpler scheme. It seems to me that lifetime already provide natural GC boundaries (they at least provide an upper-bound of the lifetime of the object) and thus that maybe it may be more natural to attach a gc to a lifetime (or set of lifetimes) rather than to a particular object ? I was thinking of something like: #pragma gc ReferenceCountingGC fn somefunction(s: String) -> Int Note that in the latter case Rust would retain the @ sigil to denote garbage collected pointers but depending on where the object was allocated the @ would not refer to the same garbage collector. I have, obviously, no idea whether this would actually practical; and it might not! -- Matthieu
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
