Warp wrote:
> Paul Fuller <pgf### [at] optusnetcomau> wrote:
>> 1)  On Garbage Collection, I regard this as a huge factor in favour of 
>> C# and .Net.
> 
>   Garbage collection is not the Holy Grail of programming (nothing is).
> And you have to know about its weaknesses. Certainly these weaknesses
> may not be relevant in many cases, but in some cases they may be.

Actually, I just got through reading a section about how to set up your 
objects to be destroyed as soon as possible, rather than waiting for the 
  normal run of the GC.  You implement a certain function ("Dispose", I 
think it was), and make a single call to the GC telling it that this 
class needs immediate destruction.

Then, any instances of that class are destroyed as soon as possible (re: 
when they go out of scope, usually), similar to how objects in C++ are 
destroyed.

I just remembered another point I was thinking, though.

The whole point of GC is to make memory management easy.  In fact, 
that's why languages like Java and C# don't like pointers.  However, 
they're really sidestepping the issue, because memory management is 
*hard*.  You don't get rid of the problem by masking it with prettiness; 
instead, you need to train better programmers.

If someone can't logically think through the memory usage of their 
program, maybe they shouldn't be programming.

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message