This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: robustness vs. conservative GC
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Tom Lord wrote:
> You push in here and it pops out there. This design would seem to to
> raise the probability of incorrectly failing to collect some genuinely
> dead objects, which is an unpredictable and uncontrollable source of
> arbitrarilly catastrophic failure, sufficiently improbable to escape
> most testing, and sufficiently serious that it ought not be ignored or
> swept under the rug with vague (and inaccurate) replies such as "the
> resulting leaks only waste a little memory" (a specific reply I do not
> attribute to Hans).
Supposing you do have exact type information for the stack, how can GC
be certain a stack slot is initialized?
If the information you have doesn't tell you that, then it isn't
> That's misleading. One practical question is whether the programmer
> has useful pre-conditions that assure an object has been collected.
> Keeping track of object references isn't "hard to predict" for all
> objects; on the contrary -- it's part of how good programmers use
> good collectors.
Your argument makes sense only for resources that are used by a