Memory leaks in managed languages
Memory leaks in managed languages
Posted May 3, 2009 19:33 UTC (Sun) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767)In reply to: Memory leaks in managed languages by drag
Parent article: Tomboy, Gnote, and the limits of forks
 Meanwhile, Tomboy has either a bug or a "feature" which causes it to suck up 32M for doing nothing. And another 7M per note for doing the one trivially simple thing that a sticky note program is supposed to do.
Furthermore, if it is a "feature". i.e. if it is just avoiding garbage collection for performance purposes, as you suggest... well, wasn't one of the central points of this article that Tomboy was annoyingly slow? And the whole idea of "performance optimization" for a trivial sticky note app is absolutely ludicrous in the first place.
If it's a memory leak, then after however many years Tomboy has been around, there is an  unbelievably huge and gaping memory leak in the code path for the one very simple thing that a sticky note app is supposed to do: create sticky notes.
Tomboy may or may not be representative of Mono's power. But it sure as hell isn't looking like a very good demonstration of Mono's amazing coolness.
      Posted May 3, 2009 19:56 UTC (Sun)
                               by drag (guest, #31333)
                              [Link] (1 responses)
       
To make it very useful it needs to look and behave simply as far as the UI is concerned, but it's quite a complex task.  
But ya things are not looking good for the Mono. 
     
    
      Posted May 4, 2009 12:25 UTC (Mon)
                               by johill (subscriber, #25196)
                              [Link] 
       
Although now fixed, it will take a very long time to trickle down to distros and makes mono suck a lot of power. 
     
    Memory leaks in managed languages
      
Memory leaks in managed languages
      
 
           