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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,19140af19dfa6e01
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-16 09:43:00 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news-out.cwix.com!pullfeed!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail
From: j-anthony@rcn.com (Jon S. Anthony)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada 0Y plans for garbage collection?
Date: 16 Sep 2003 12:48:41 -0400
Sender: jsa@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com
Message-ID: <m3n0d4llw6.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
References: <MPG.19c7f581f148da0798975a@News.CIS.DFN.DE>
 <C%o7b.5360$Yt.298@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <wvbr3cf5m8su.fsf@sun.com> <1127954.kcBZz6amlf@linux1.krischik.com>
 <3F60E747.40805@attbi.com> <l213mvgattffdctsato5fpsh7g0uq00cfd@4ax.com>
 <1557617.vUiuI5kIPQ@linux1.krischik.com> <ur82jujq3.fsf@xsol.com>
 <m3smmzc9se.fsf@insalien.org> <3F651919.80808@attbi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVbUENME9xDAI/+VQXXpjrjLEhFeQU4+Ku45KM/kBYRw2B0FFyStm608
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Sep 2003 16:42:38 GMT
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42578
Date: 2003-09-16T16:42:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@attbi.com> writes:

> Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> 
> > Linus Torvalds differs quite strongly on this:
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-08/msg00571.html

Modern GCs do in fact take locality and temporal aspects into account.
So, this may not be particularly relevant in the general case.

> Couldn't have said it better myself.  On one project I wanted to
> compare using garbage collection to Controlled types and managing the
> allocation and deallocation of objects myself.

Having used manual new/free, controlled types style, "smart pointers";
and modern generational GCs with, my experience strongly indicates
that you cannot beat a GC in the general case.  Moreover, in a
"typical" application, you can't beat a GC with any combination of the
former techniques wrt overall throughput.

YMMV, but unless you use true state of the art versions, the sort of
example you give here is pretty irrelevant.

/Jon