Re: why malloc/free instead of GC?
Enrico Weigelt <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.programming.garbage-collection.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 08:27:55AM -0600, Charles Fiterman wrote: <snip> > Reference counting also has the advantage that the destruction of objects > can have rational finalizers. Finalizers must be safe, general, sure, > prompt and ordered. Safe means they don't violate the type system. General > means finalizers can run any code in the language and have that code > produce normal results, for example exceptions can't just get discarded. > Sure means if you build an object it gets to destroy itself. Prompt means > finalizers aren't indefinitely postponed. Ordered means finalizers run in a > determined order, if you ship the application you don't change the order > creating portability bugs. reference counting is tricky if you're using ring structures. if you use an 'clean' refcounting (_each_ time you're referencing, increase the counter, and always decrease on dereference), you'll get dead chunks which will never be freed, when using an ring structure. cu -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt == metux ITS Webhosting ab 5 EUR/Monat. UUCP, rawIP und vieles mehr. phone: +49 36207 519931 www: http://www.metux.de/ fax: +49 36207 519932 email: [email protected] cellphone: +49 174 7066481 smsgate: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Diese Mail wurde mit UUCP versandt. http://www.metux.de/uucp/