[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: no constants please
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> writes:
>> From: Michael Sperber <sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Tom> If the root set is large, certainly it should be traced in several
Tom> steps, using barriers to preserve its invariants.
>> Is there a practical example of a system that does this? It seems
>> very difficult to do, even absent an FFI to C, as your typical root
>> set---the current continuation---changes *all the time*. (I'm really
>> curious. I could never wrap my mind around this.)
Tom> You can treat the "big-three abstract registers" (continuation, code,
Tom> and environment) specially. They have usefully limited usage
Tom> patterns. It's the other roots, if your implementation has them,
Tom> that are of greater interest. (The draft FFI creates "other roots".)
That isn't the question I asked. All hard questions are buried behind
Tom> If you want to have a chat about incremental GC strategies, please
Tom> c'mon over to the pika-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list:
It seems the GC list would be the right place to discuss this.
Tom> Not all incremental collectors are incompatible with the FFI (a mostly
Tom> copying semi-conservative incremental GC would be one example).
This was actually a precise non-copying incremental GC.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla