Re: My thoughts on C# and gaming.
Jon Watte <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.devel.sweng |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I don't see why you'd lose the safety. Because it's CLR-derived you don't need a conservative garbage collector. Thus, you can assert (in non-final builds) that no back pointers exist into that pool when you blow it away. Given that pool-blowing-awaying generally should only happen during loading time, that assert shouldn't get in the way much of regular play testing etc. Sincerely, jw -- Americans might object: there is no way we would sacrifice our living standards for the benefit of people in the rest of the world. Nevertheless, whether we get there willingly or not, we shall soon have lower consumption rates, because our present rates are unsustainable. On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Miguel de Icaza <[email protected]> wrote: > > You do loose the safety (say, you keep an object alive after you > released the pool), but you get the control that you need. > > > _______________________________________________ Sweng-Gamedev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.midnightryder.com/listinfo.cgi/sweng-gamedev-midnightryder.com