Warp wrote:
> It's not really so much a fault of C++ per se, but more a fault of the
> system library tasked on the memory management.

Yah.  It *can* be a fault of the standard for a language, tho. For 
example, doesn't C++ require that "destroy" and "free()" basically do 
the same things to the memory allocation? In the sense that "new" isn't 
allowed to look at the type and (say) overallocate a block and do its 
own sub-block management type stuff?  I.e., in the sense that the 
standard library isn't allowed to do some of the stuff you might do 
yourself by overriding "new"?

>   Using a more efficient memory allocator can cause amazing speedups, as
> I wrote on that page.

That's one of the ways GC can be faster than manual memory management. 
Many, many memory management libraries really suck bigtime, while a 
tremendous amount of time is spent making GC fast.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message