From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3498dd887729ed19
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: fjh@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: Garbage Collection in Ada
Date: 1996/10/23
Message-ID: <54kc0t$ovd@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 191411662
references: <199610181934142408603@dialup101-3-15.swipnet.se>
 <Dzos04.A7L.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-10-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


mg@dsd.camb.inmet.com (Mitch Gart) writes:

>What I don't like is the idea that the GC will have to go through ALL
>data memory (and registers) looking for pointers.  The time it takes
>to make a scan is proportional to total memory size rather than proportional
>to the number of pointers in use, or proportional to the number of 
>heap blocks, or proportional to some other reasonable value.

With the Boehm GC, memory that does not contain any pointers,
such as strings, bit-vectors, arrays of ints, and so forth,
can be allocated using GC_malloc_atomic() rather than GC_malloc().
If you use GC_malloc_atomic() to allocate data areas that will
not contain pointers, then the GC will not scan those data areas.

--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>   |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>   |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3         |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.