Games in C++ with GC? (why malloc/free instead of GC?)
Thomas Johnsson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.programming.garbage-collection.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Further to this disscussion about the use of GC: Games, espcially 3D games, are often written in C++, using DirectX (or OpenGL). Is there any experience in using GC ()conservative or not) in such applications? Being a sort of real time program, I can imagine GC latencies is a potential problem ... ??? -- Thomas Johnsson Basile STARYNKEVITCH writes: > >>>>> "Michael" == Michael Hicks <[email protected]> writes: > > Michael> A number of performance studies (starting with Zorn in > Michael> `92, but perhaps before?) and anecdotal evidence now > Michael> suggests that there is little reason to use malloc/free > Michael> over GC. Zorn states that the main shot against > Michael> conservative GC is that it requires a larger memory > Michael> footprint (and actually uses much of it). Another shot > Michael> might be the unexpected latency resulting from GC, > Michael> foiling soft real-time guarantees. > > I tend to believe that people prefer malloc&free to Boehm's GC without > real technical reasons, but mostly for social reasons. [The almost > only soft realtime guarantee people want -outside the embedded market- > is compatibility with graphical user interfaces time requirements] > > Most people I know that are proficient C coders did not even heard of > GC techniques (in particular Boehm's GC) before I talked them about > it. > [etc]