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.)
>
3 matches
Mail list logo
