Alain wrote:
> Garbage collection is BAAAAD!!!
> Any implementation that permit you not to use that is GOOD.

Uh, not sure why you'd say this. You're looking at one implementation of 
one garbage collector, and deducing from this that the entire concept is 
bad? You *are* aware there are such things as real-time garbage 
collectors, for example?

I can't imagine a GC that takes 15 minutes on anything that isn't paging 
like mad. In which case the problems isn't the GC, but the paging, in 
which case you should say "paging is baaaaad!"  :-)

I mean, really, how can you imagine any decent GC would take more than 
(say) three times the length of time it takes to read all physical memory?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message