On 2014/05/08 14:05:28, rossberg wrote:
On 2014/05/08 14:03:13, Sven Panne wrote:
> I'm working on weak stuff this quarter, so I'd like to chime in... :-)
>
> Adding yet another weak list would make the atomic pauses at the end of
GC
> longer, so we should try to avoid adding yet another list. What about
the
> following approach: Use a timestamp in the map, and remember that in the
map.
If
> the timestamp hasn't changed, there's no need to do anything special in
the
> iterator. Otherwise one would have to get in sync again with the map,
but
this
> will probably happen very rarely.
Yeah, we discussed that, but the problem is that there is no obvious way
to
get
in sync again.
Yeah, I do not see how that would work.
Another option is to not allow compacting of the list while there are live
iterators. Then the map would only need to keep track of number of live
iterators. We would still need to have some kind of finalization though.
https://codereview.chromium.org/259883002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to v8-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
