Posted Sep 6, 2007 16:00 UTC (Thu) by IkeTo
In reply to: Taste
Parent article: LinuxConf.eu: Documentation and user-space API design
> Allocating objects on the stack and passing parameters by reference are,
> contrary to your apparent belief, neither innovations in C++, nor rendered
> impossible in a garbage collected language; again I cite Oberon, which is
> just fine with both and yet fully GC'd.
I never say they are never "rendered impossible" (Even C++ does that!), and the "apparent belief" seems very speculative (e.g., Even assembly does stack based allocation!). Let me remind the beginning of my original post.
> "I think one problem of *many* GC systems is that..."
(emphasis added here)
What I mean is that many "short-comings" that others talk about GC are not intrinsic to the availability of GC, but instead they are due to particular languages which have made certain choices, like which of the allocations they choose to tax the GC system. Again, most people should not care at all.
> Appel (1987) shows that garbage collection can still end up faster than
> stack-based allocation.
I'm interested in this work. Is it available on-line, or if not, can you give the name of the journal/conference where it appear in?
to post comments)