Subject:
|
FWD: Re: Some comments (long)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx
|
Date:
|
Sat, 8 May 1999 15:54:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1472 times
|
| |
|
|
stephen p spackman wrote:
> But think about it: a garbage collector can release memory *as soon as
> is logically possible*. This *must* be no worse than an explicit-release
> system. If the gc waits longer, that is a pure - and automatically
> managed - time/space tradeoff.
In environments which provide general purpose pointer types which can be
assigned to addresses of explicitly allocated memory (like C and C++),
garbage collection becomes an NP-hard problem. In environments which have
no end-user accessible pointer type, explicit memory allocation is
superfluous.
> > Mark
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Some comments (long)
|
| (...) This is FUD. What causes Java to gobble memory is more likely (a) the amount of header overhead it places on objects (more to do with hashing support than gc, I suspect) and (b), to a lesser extent, the fact that objects are never "expanded" (...) (25 years ago, 8-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
