adding destroyable objects into Ggc

Gabriel Dos Reis gdr@integrable-solutions.net
Wed Oct 19 12:14:00 GMT 2011


On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Basile Starynkevitch
<basile@starynkevitch.net> wrote:

> I do think that the fact that some other big free software starts by explaining how to
> manage their memory is significant.

Storage management is important.  However, I believe it is a mistake to
focus only on that or to start the presentation of a project with that.
No matter how popular it is.

> I also agree with you that GCC architecture is messy, and that scares newscomer a lot.
>

Yes, but the way we improve it isn't, in my opinion, adding more GC.
First we would like to remove complexity, and I do not think we should
start by focusing on storage management until we get a clearer idea
about lifetime of data structures we manipulate and how they mesh.
We might find out (as I suspect) that the builtin GC of C (or C++) is
remarkable at the job, provided we have a design that makes the
lifetime obvious and take advantage of it.



More information about the Gcc mailing list