On Nov 1, 2013, at 3:17 PM, Jason Orendorff wrote:
> On 11/1/13 1:52 PM, David Bruant wrote:
>> In any case, I've stopped being against weakrefs after a message by
>> Mark Miller[...]
> I am now going to try to convince you that you shouldn't have been
> convinced by this use case. :)
>
>> To ke
On Nov 1, 2013, at 1:26 PM, Terrence Cole wrote:
> ...
>
> Secondly, correctness. The GC is by definition a cross-cutting concern;
> you cannot build anything in SpiderMonkey without considering GC. This
> makes weak primitives a cross-cutting concern of a cross-cutting
> concern. Our experience
On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Niko Matsakis wrote:
>
> In any case, Brendan's e-mail suggesting tenuring weakly referenced
> objects offered one possible workaround for maintaining top nursery
> performance in the face of weak refs. (I have no idea, of course, if
> this is what the JVM does.)
>
You're hitting slowpath named property accesses (JSOP_GETELEM style)
which are going through an Ion IC, but which are not getting optimized
stubs added to handle them.
Tracking down the relevant code with the in-browser might be helpful...
The gecko profiler addon should be able to help here.
Hi,
Recently my trunk builds have been sluggish at times. It varies a
lot, but some days I have lots of pauses. It seems to happen when I
have lots of bugzilla tabs open, though I'm not certain that's a
factor. I also use Chatzilla, which may be a factor.
A number of the times it's happened I'
Hi,
I had the with-NSPR builds working recently, but today I'm getting a
linking error:
/usr/bin/ld.bfd.real: cannot find
/home/njn/moz/mc/co64/dist/include/nspr: File format not recognised
/home/njn/moz/mc/co64/dist/include/nspr is present and is a directory
containing the NSPR header files,
Niko Matsakis wrote:
- Why do you say Java doesn't have a weakmap? What is the
[WeakHashMap][2] class if not a WeakMap? Presumably we are using the
term differently? (I imagine there are many variations of weakmaps
which vary in subtle but significant ways)
Quoting from [2]:
"*Impleme
On 11/01/2013 05:26 PM, Jason Orendorff wrote:
This proposal is before TC39 for inclusion in the next ECMAScript spec
edition following ES6:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:weak_references
Mozilla GC hackers are opposed, for reasons they can articulate; I'm
opposed because I c
On 3 November 2013 22:07, Niko Matsakis wrote:
> - Aren't we talking about weak refs? I thought a weakmap in JS was a
> done deal? I believe Java's weak refs, and in particular weak
> references when combined with [reference queues][1], are pretty
> similar to what the strawman proposed.
>
>
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Niko Matsakis wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 09:22:31PM +0100, Igor Bukanov wrote:
> > On 2 November 2013 12:24, Niko Matsakis wrote:
> > > The Java VM (where G1 was developed) supports weak refs. Any idea what
> is
> > > different there or how they managed it?
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 09:22:31PM +0100, Igor Bukanov wrote:
> On 2 November 2013 12:24, Niko Matsakis wrote:
> > The Java VM (where G1 was developed) supports weak refs. Any idea what is
> > different there or how they managed it?
>
> Java does not have WeakMap. Weak references, despite their
>
Bobby Holley wrote:
This won't solve esoteric cross-vat use cases, but I think it would be a
nice way to bulldoze the subtle gotchas that make it so easy to introduce
subtle leaks in large-scale JS.
With an MVC framework, nukeSandbox is of no avail. The subject does not
want to extend the life
Le 03/11/2013 11:29, Bobby Holley a écrit :
The problem with weak references is that they put the GC in the driver's
seat, which makes it very hard to avoid revealing GC secrets to the client.
Instead, I propose that we let the client code drive, and see how far we
get with hueyfix-style tools.
Le 03/11/2013 12:49, Jorge Chamorro a écrit :
When would be the right time to free(something)?
What would `something` be after the call to free(), null?
What if `something` isn't the only reference to the thing?
I don't think Bobby was suggesting the addition of a free function or
operator. Th
On 3 November 2013 12:49, Jorge Chamorro wrote:
> If not, what exactly would free(thing) do?
That is is easy - it ensures that the thing does not reference any
other GC things (including references as keys in a WeakMap) so it
cannot be a part of reference cycle. Currently this cannot be even
impl
On 2 November 2013 15:28, David Bruant wrote:
>>function f(e){tellSomebodyAboutTheEvent(x);}
>>
>>(function(){
>>var iframe = document.getElementByTagName('iframe')[0];
>>iframe.addEventListener('someEvent', f);
>>})()
>>
> There is a point in your p
On 03/11/2013, at 11:29, Bobby Holley wrote:
>
>
> What if we give script the ability to say "this Foo is semantically dead -
> please neuter cross-global references to it"? This is effectively what we
> have with Cu.nukeSandbox, and it works well. It doesn't in any way expose
> GC behavior, but
The problem with weak references is that they put the GC in the driver's
seat, which makes it very hard to avoid revealing GC secrets to the client.
Instead, I propose that we let the client code drive, and see how far we
get with hueyfix-style tools.
One of the major difficulties with leak preven
18 matches
Mail list logo
